Tag: Higher

  • Colleges promote media literacy skills for students

    Colleges promote media literacy skills for students

    Young people today spend a large amount of time online, with a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report noting teens ages 12 to 17 had four or more hours of daily screen time during July 2021 to December 2023.

    This digital exposure can impact teens’ mental health, according to Pew Research, with four in 10 young people saying they’re anxious when they don’t have their smartphones and 39 percent saying they have cut back their time on social media. But online presences can also impact how individuals process information, as well as their ability to distinguish between news, advertisement, opinion and entertainment.

    A December Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab found seven out of 10 of college students would rate their current level of media literacy as somewhat or very high, but they consider their college peers’ literacy less highly, with only 32 percent rating students as a whole as somewhat or very highly media literate.

    A majority of students (62 percent) also indicate they are at least moderately concerned about the spread of misinformation among their college peers, with 26 percent saying their concern was very high.

    To address students’ digital literacy, colleges and universities can provide education and support in a variety of ways. The greatest share of Student Voice respondents (35 percent) say colleges and universities should create digital resources to learn about media literacy. But few institutions offer this kind of service or refer students to relevant resources for self-education.

    Methodology

    Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab polled 1,026 students at 181 two- and four-year institutions from Dec. 19 to 23. The margin of error is 3 percent. Explore the findings yourself  here, here and here.

    What is media literacy? Media literacy, as defined in the survey, is the ability or skills to critically analyze for accuracy, credibility or evidence of bias in the content created and consumed in sources including radio, television, the internet and social media.

    A majority of survey respondents indicate they use at least one measure regularly to check the accuracy of information they’re receiving, including thinking critically about the message delivered, analyzing the source’s perspective or bias, verifying information with other sources, or pausing to check information before sharing with others.

    A missing resource: While there are many groups that offer digital resources or online curriculum for teachers, particularly in the K-12 space, less common are self-guided digital resources tailored to young people in higher education.

    “Create digital resources for students” was the No. 1 response across respondent groups and characteristics and was even more popular among community college respondents (38 percent) and adult learners (42 percent), which may highlight students’ preferences for learning outside the classroom, particularly for those who may be employed or caregivers.

    Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism offers a free self-directed media literacy course that includes webinars with journalism and media experts, as well as exercises for reflection. Similarly, Baylor University’s library offers a microcourse, lasting 10 minutes, that can be embedded into Canvas and that awards students a badge upon completion.

    The University of North Carolina at Charlotte provides a collection of resources on a Respectful Conversation website that includes information on free expression, media literacy, constructive dialogue and critical thinking. On this website, users can also identify online classes, many of which are free, that provide an overview or a deeper level look at additional topics such as misinformation and deepfakes.

    The American Library Association has a project, Media Literacy Education in Libraries for Adult Audiences, that is designed to assist libraries in their work to improve media literacy skills among adults in the community. The project includes webinars, a resource guide for practitioners.

    Does your college or university have a self-guided digital resource for students to engage in media literacy education? Tell us more.

    Source link

  • Here’s where AI, VR and AR are boosting learning in higher ed

    Here’s where AI, VR and AR are boosting learning in higher ed

    Australian universities and TAFEs are embracing and combining emerging technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR).

    These innovations are reshaping the further and higher education sectors, offering more engaging, accessible, data-based learning experiences for students, educators and institutions alike.

    As students and institutions seek value amidst economic and work-life challenges, these technologies are crucial in delivering sustainable and scalable skilling and workforce-development goals. Integrating AI, VR, and AR can provide more personalised and cost-effective learning pathways for students facing daily pressures, making education more accessible and financially viable.

    The transformative role of AI in personalised learning

    AI is becoming a game-changer in Australian education by enabling personalised learning and providing data-driven insights. AI-powered platforms can analyse the complex interplay of factors impacting student performance and customise immersive content delivery to improve persistence, resilience and success.

    This integrated approach can serve personalised springboard content that matches students’ strengths, promotes growth in areas of weakness, and builds both capability and confidence.

    In this way, AI is not just about student learning; it also directly benefits teachers and professional staff. It streamlines the development of educational materials, from video and interactive content to branched lessons and adaptive learning paths.

    A few Australian higher and vocational education institutions have already demonstrated this by exploring the affordances of AI-driven platforms to offer personalised learning programs tailored to students’ career goals and development needs.

    Researchers from the University of South Australia are proving how AI can enhance students’ learning outcomes, equip teachers with advanced education tools and overhaul the education sector for good.

    At the University of Sydney, AI-driven learning platforms offer personalised learning experiences via the university’s generative AI platform, Cogniti, which shows that generative AI is a powerful way to support teachers and their teaching, not supplant them.

    Immersive learning through VR

    Virtual reality also continues to revolutionise Australian further and higher education, providing immersive learning environments that make complex subjects more accessible and engaging.

    From medical schools to engineering programs and advanced manufacturing, VR allows students to engage with practical scenarios that realistically present workplace problems, assess skills application and assess complex tasks.

    VR is a technology with tremendous promise in scaling high-quality and safe immersive learning by doing training at TAFE NSW.

    Its Ultimo campus utilises a high-tech, remarkably lifelike canine mannequin to provide aspiring veterinary nurses with invaluable hands-on training.

    Recently imported from the USA, this highly advanced model enables animal studies and veterinary nursing students to develop essential clinical skills, including intubation, CPR, bandaging and ear cleaning.

    By implementing VR as a training tool, TAFE NSW Ultimo plumbing students can learn to recognise potential risk from return electrical current via copper pipes into a residence, which can cause serious, even fatal, electric shock, in a safe and protected environment.

    Additionally, its welding students were able to identify and solve potentially hazardous scenarios when preparing for welding work.

    AR brings practical training to life

    AR is another immersive technology revolutionising Australian education by deepening the interaction between students and their learning materials. AR overlays digital content in the real world, making abstract concepts more tangible and understandable.

    AR is broadly applicable across diverse fields such as healthcare, technical trades, and construction, allowing students to practice and refine their skills in a controlled, simulated environment.

    At TAFE Queensland, welding students use AR to identify and solve potentially hazardous scenarios when preparing for welding work. 

    With a screen inside the helmet, students position their virtual welding torch, with sparks flying like in real life, against a plastic board and press the torch trigger to see the welds they have made.

    The screen flashes red when they are incorrect and gives them a score at the end. Using AR in welding has reduced raw material wastage by 68 per cent at a time of scarcity.

    TAFE Box Hill Institute’s Advanced Welder Training Centre is equipped with the latest augmented reality simulators, allowing students to use best-practice technology and quality systems in a hands-on environment.

    It was developed in collaboration with Weld Australia, which represents Australian welding professionals, and will help address the current shortage of qualified and skilled welders in Australia.

    Monash University’s Engineering Student Pilot Plant is designed to reflect real-world industrial environments and requirements.

    AR experiences are being developed in Vuforia Studio using 3D CAD models of the pilot plant, enabling visualisation of proposed equipment before installation.

    These AR interfaces will integrate with Internet of Things (IoT) devices, Digital Twin models and process simulations, creating an AR-based Human Machine Interface (HMI) that enhances on-site accessibility by providing remote, simultaneous interaction with the physical equipment and its Digital Twin.

    The future of Australian further and higher education

    The future of further and higher education in Australia will likely see these advanced digital technologies integrated further into the curriculum, offering new opportunities and skills for students to thrive in a competitive, tech-driven environment.

    Australia’s educational institutions have a rich history of effectively using educational technology to further learning and teaching.

    Assessing and leveraging rapidly evolving tools like AR and Gen AI will ensure they remain at the forefront of global education by providing students with the relevant and engaging learning experiences they need to succeed.

    Tony Maguire is regional director of ANZ at global learning technology company D2L.

    Source link

  • The higher education sector needs to come together to renew its commitment to enhancing student engagement

    The higher education sector needs to come together to renew its commitment to enhancing student engagement

    “Engagement, to me, is probably…getting the most out of university…taking and making the most of available opportunities.”

    This quote, from Queen’s University Belfast students’ union president Kieron Minto sums up a lot of the essential elements of what we talk about when we talk about student engagement.

    It captures the sense that the higher education experience has multiple dimensions, incorporating personal and professional development as well as academic study. Students will be – and feel – successful to the extent that they invest time and energy in those activities that are the most purposeful. Critically, it captures the element of student agency in their own engagement – higher education institutions might make opportunities available but students need to decide to engage to get the most from them.

    In recent years “student engagement” has suffered from the curse of ubiquity. Its meanings and applications are endlessly debated. Is it about satisfaction, academic success, personal growth, or a combination of factors? There is a wealth of examples of discrete projects and frameworks for thinking about student engagement, but often little read-across from one context to another. We can celebrate the enormous amount of learning and insight that has been created while at the same time accepting that as the environment for higher education changes some of the practices that have evolved may no longer be fit for purpose.

    Higher education institutions and the students that are enrolled in them face a brace of challenges, from the learning and development losses of the Covid pandemic, to rising costs and income constraints, to technological change. Institutions are less able to support provision of the breadth of enriching opportunities to students at the same time as students have less money, time, and emotional bandwidth to devote to making the most of university.

    The answer, as ever, is not to bemoan the circumstances, or worse, blame students for being less able to engage, but to tool up, get strategic, and adapt.

    Students still want to make the most of the opportunities that higher education has to offer. The question is how to design and configure those opportunities so that current and future students continue to experience them as purposeful and meaningful.

    Fresh student engagement thinking

    Our report, Future-proofing student engagement in higher education, brings together the perspectives of academic and professional services staff, higher education leaders, and students, all from a range of institutions, to establish a firm foundation of principles and practices that can support coherent, intentional student engagement strategies.

    A foundational principle for student engagement is that students’ motivations and engagement behaviours are shaped by their backgrounds, prior experiences, current environments, and hopes and expectations for their futures – as explained by Ella Kahu in her socio-cultural framework for student engagement (2013).

    It follows that it is impossible to think about or have any kind of meaningful organisational strategy about student engagement without working closely in partnership with students, drawing on a wide range of data and insight about the breadth of students’ opinions, behaviours, and experiences. Similarly, it follows that a data-informed approach to student engagement must mean that the strategy evolves as students do – taking student engagement seriously means adopting an institutional mindset of preparedness to adapt in light of feedback.

    Where our research indicates that there needs to be a strategic shift is in the embrace of what might be termed a more holistic approach to student engagement, in two important senses.

    The first is understanding at a conceptual level how student engagement is realised in practice throughout every aspect of the student journey, and not just manifested in traditional metrics around attendance and academic performance.

    The second is in how institutions, in partnership with students, map out a shared strategic intent for student engagement for every stage of that journey. That includes designing inclusive and purposeful interventions and opportunities to engage, and using data and insight from students to deepen understanding of what factors enable engagement and what makes an experience feel purposeful and engaging – and ideally creating a flow of data and insight that can inform continuous enhancement of engagement.

    Theory into practice

    Our research also points to how some of that shift might be realised in practice. For example, student wellbeing is intimately linked to engagement, because tired, anxious, excluded or overwhelmed students are much less able to engage. When we spoke to university staff about wellbeing support they were generally likely to focus on student services provision. But students highlighted a need for a more proactive culture of wellbeing throughout the institution, including embedding wellbeing considerations into the curriculum and nurturing a supportive campus culture. Similarly, on the themes of community and belonging, while university staff were likely to point to institutional strategic initiatives to cultivate belonging, students talked more about their need for genuine individual connections, especially with peers.

    There was also a strong theme emerging about how institutions think about actively empowering students to have the confidence and skills to “navigate the maze” of higher education opportunities and future career possibilities. Pedagogies of active learning, for example, build confidence and a sense of ownership over learning, contributing to behavioural and psychological engagement. Developing students’ digital literacy means that students can more readily deploy technology to support connection with academics and course peers, make active critical choices about how they invest time in different platforms, and prepare for their future workplace. Before getting exercised about how today’s students do not arrive in higher education “prepared to engage,” it’s worth remembering just how much larger and more complicated the contemporary university is, and with these, the increased demands on students.

    While there is a lot that institutions can do to move forward their student engagement agenda independently, there is also a need for a renewed focus on student engagement from the higher education sector as a whole. The megathemes contributing to shifting student engagement patterns are shared; they are not distinctive to any institution type, geography, or student demographic.

    The promise of higher education – that you can transform your life, your identity and your future through a higher education experience – only holds true if students are willing and able to engage with it. This demands a unified effort from all involved.

    Institutions must prioritise student engagement, placing it at the heart of their strategies and decisions. Furthermore, the higher education sector as a whole must renew its focus on student engagement, recognising its fundamental role in achieving the goals of higher education. Finally, as regulatory bodies evolve their approach to the assessment and enhancement of academic quality, student engagement must once again be put front and centre of the higher education endeavour.

    This article is published in association with evasys. You can download a copy of Future-proofing student engagement here.

    Source link

  • Shaping higher education for commuter students

    Shaping higher education for commuter students

    For the first time, there are now more commuter students in the UK – students who continue to live at home whilst studying, rather than relocating to attend university – than traditional residential students.

    Surprised? You’re not alone. My research on commuter students suggests that even commuter students themselves don’t realise that there are others like them. In common with most of those who shape higher education pedagogy, policy, practices and plans for the future, they believe that they are a minority, an anomaly, inconsistent with the (presumed) majority of “normal,” residential students.

    The sector is increasingly waking up to the needs and experiences of commuter students, supported by the inclusion of commuters in the Office for Students Equality of Opportunity Risk Register in England – Emma Maslin has explored this further on the site.

    It is essential, for students, higher education institutions and the future viability of our sector, that we increase awareness of commuter students – who they are and what they need – and that we reshape higher education provision for this growing cohort.

    Students will benefit from a better experience and outcomes. Institutions will benefit from higher retention, league table position and therefore recruitment. The sector as a whole will benefit from greater financial stability and clear evidence to the government that we are meeting their priorities and truly expanding access and improving outcomes for non-traditional students.

    Who commutes – and why?

    Commuter students are diverse. However, there is a strong correlation between being a non-traditional student – those targeted by widening participation initiatives – and being a commuter student.

    This is because many of the reasons that students have historically been unable or unwilling to enrol in higher education are the same as those that make them unable or unwilling to relocate. These include affordability, being first in family to higher education, from a low-participation neighbourhood, having caring or family commitments, over 25. Commuters are also likely to be in employment, be home owners, to be studying part time, at lower-tariff universities. Finally, my research suggests that commuter students are more likely to be local students, not long-distance learners.

    This said, commuting isn’t always about widening participation. It is likely that the undersupply of student accommodation and resultant increasing prices, alongside the cost-of-living crisis, are encouraging traditional students to remain at home. There is also evidence to suggest that international and postgraduate students are more likely to be commuters, both key target markets for UK higher education institutions.

    Relocation as a predictor of success

    But why does this matter? Data tell us that commuter students have a poorer experience throughout the student lifecycle. Choice of institution, access to learning, resources, support and extra-curricular activities, are all restricted. Commuters are less able to engage with in-person learning activities and are isolated from their learning community.

    They feel less a sense of belonging, more a sense of burden. In consequence, commuter students have lower attainment, continuation and graduate outcomes than their residential counterparts.

    In part, this is because higher education has been designed without consideration of the need to travel. Pedagogy, policy and processes have historically been and continue to be shaped around residential students. Assessments, extracurricular activities, facilities, learning and wellbeing support, teaching activities, timetabling—all continue to be premised on the residential model, structured for the residential student, provided at a time and in a place that assumes that students live on or near to campus.

    What next?

    The first step is to see our commuters. Count them, to make them count. Make them visible, not only to decision makers and practitioners, but also to each other. Provide information for commuters, before, during and after application. Create a sense of belonging, building community through awareness, acceptance and actions such as repurposing unused parts of the estate, for commuter students – a common room, sleeping areas.

    Next, review all policies for accessibility, with particular focus on timetabling, attendance, learning and teaching, support services and skills development.

    Make changes where necessary, enabling students to maximise access, whilst minimising travel. Rethink in-person learning and make attendance worth it. Consider online learning, but avoid hybrid learning and include on-commute learning options.

    Myth busting

    For commuter students, access to learning isn’t just about distance. It’s not even just about transport. We need to look at the acceptability, accessibility, affordability and availability of transport. However, we also need to recognise that access and participation are also about students’ activities, responsibilities and relationships, outside of the classroom.

    The data tell us that our commuter students are struggling to adapt to pedagogy, policies and practices that are based on the assumption that they will relocate to attend university. Our ability to adapt our provision to their needs is likely to be key to the future sustainability of many of our institutions, if not the sector as a whole.

    This article is the first in our series on commuter students where we’ll explore their student journey and what support institutions and the sector can provide to enhance their experience. If you’d like to get involved in the series, we’d welcome further contributions, email [email protected] to pitch us an article.

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer : Higher Education Inquirer: Increasingly Relevant

    Higher Education Inquirer : Higher Education Inquirer: Increasingly Relevant

    The Higher Education continues to grow. We believe our growth stems largely from our increasing relevance and in our truth telling, which other higher education news outlets are unwilling to do in these times.

    Our devotion to transparency, accountability, and value for our readers guides us. 

    We invite a diverse group of guest authors who are willing to share their truths. The list includes academics from various disciplines, advocates, activists, journalists, consultants, and whistleblowers. We back up all of this work with data and critical analysis, irrespective of politics and social conventions. We are willing to challenge the higher education establishment, including trustees, donors, and university presidents.

    Our articles covering student loan debt, academic labor, nonviolent methods of protest, and freedom of speech are unparalleled. And we are not shy about including other issues that matter to our readers, including stories and videos about mental health, student safety, technology (such as artificial intelligence), academic cheating, and the nature of work.  And matters of of war, peace, democracy, and climate change. 

    Our focus, though mainly on US higher education, also has an international appeal. 

    Some of our work takes years to produce, through careful documentation of primary and secondary sources, database analysis, and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. We share all of this information for everyone to see, at no cost.  

    Of course, we could not operate without all your voices. We welcome all your voices. Something few other sources are willing to do.    

    Source link

  • Accreditors brace for Trump’s promised higher ed shakeup

    Accreditors brace for Trump’s promised higher ed shakeup

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

    WASHINGTON — On the 2024 campaign trail, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump accused the nation’s faculty of being “obsessed with indoctrinating America’s youth” and declared, “The time has come to reclaim our once great educational institutions from the radical Left.”

    His administration’s “secret weapon” in this conflict would be the accreditation system for colleges and universities. 

    “When I return to the White House, I will fire the radical Left accreditors that have allowed our colleges to become dominated by Marxist maniacs and lunatics,” he said in a July 2023 campaign video. “We will then accept applications for new accreditors who will impose real standards on colleges once again and once and for all.”

    Earlier this week, officials and professionals from the accreditation system that Trump vowed to upend met in Washington, D.C., for the Council for Higher Education Accreditation’s annual conference to discuss the major topics facing the sector — not least among them being the second Trump administration that took office a week earlier.

    Along with the wholesale replacement of accreditors that Trump promised, plenty of other aspects of accreditation work could change under the new administration and with a Republican majority in Congress. Here is a look at some of the big political and policy questions under discussion. 

    Working with a new Education Department

    The U.S. Department of Education recognizes accreditors, which in turn vet and accredit institutions, rendering them eligible for Title IV federal financial aid, such as student loans and Pell Grants. 

    That makes the department’s relationship with accreditors of paramount importance to the latter group, and it would make the department the agent for enacting Trump’s policies. 

    “There will be — and we don’t know the scope of it yet — efforts to use accreditors to advance the administration’s policies, particularly around areas of DEI,” Jon Fansmith, senior vice president of government relations and national engagement at the American Council on Education, said during a panel Wednesday.

    One of Trump’s campaign pledges was to remove “all DEI bureaucrats” from higher education. As a senator, Trump’s vice president, JD Vance, introduced a federal bill last year that would have barred accreditors from enacting DEI requirements at colleges. A bill with a similar aim passed the House last year, but died in committee in the Senate. 

    With the change in administration will come a new Education Secretary. Fansmith described Trump’s pick to head the Education Department, Linda McMahon, as “pragmatic.” He also said her stint as head of the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first term went “remarkably smoothly.”

    “There are reasons to think that where she has weighed into the [higher ed] policy space, there’s opportunities to work with her,” Fansmith added.

    As for Trump’s stated desire to eliminate the department altogether? “Spoiler, the department won’t be abolished,” Fansmith said. 

    Jan Friis, CHEA’s senior vice president for government affairs, pointed out that the first bill proposing the elimination of the Education Department so far during the current House of Representatives term had no cosponsors. 

    Further attacks on DEI

    Colleges across the country have faced a Republican-led crusade against their diversity, equity and inclusion efforts over the past few years — and those attacks are only poised to grow stronger under the Trump administration. 

    On the first full day of his presidency, Trump issued an executive order calling for agencies to identify organizations, including colleges with endowments worth over $1 billion, for potential investigations into their DEI work. 

    The mounting backlash against DEI means that higher education leaders will have to frame “compelling narratives” about their equity work to help people see what they’re doing and why, Debra Humphreys, vice president of strategic engagement at Lumina Foundation, told conference attendees Tuesday.

    “How do we talk about all of that work in a way that more people can understand?” Humphreys said. “That’s become harder.”

    That’s because people who hear words like “equity” and “inclusion” often fall into two camps, Humphreys said.

    Source link

  • HESA’s AI Observatory: What’s new in higher education (January 31, 2025)

    HESA’s AI Observatory: What’s new in higher education (January 31, 2025)

    Transformation of education

    Leading Through Disruption: Higher Education Leaders Assess AI’s Impacts on Teaching and Learning

    Rainie, L. and Watson, E. AAC&U and Elon University.

    Report from a survey of 337 college and university leaders that provides a status report on the fast-moving changes taking place on US campuses. Key data takeaways include the fact faculty use of AI tools trails significantly behind student use, more than a third of leaders surveyed perceive their institution to be below average or behind others in using GenAI tools, 59% say that cheating has increased on their campus since GenAI tools have become widely available, and 45% think the impact of GenAI on their institutions in the next five years will be more positive than negative.

    Four objectives to guide artificial intelligence’s impact on higher education

    Aldridge, S. Times Higher Education. January 27th, 2025

    The four objectives are: 1) ensure that curricula prepare students to use AI in their careers and to add human skills value to help them success in parallel of expanded use of AI; 2) employ AI-based capacities to enhance the effectiveness and value of the education delivered; 3) leverage AI to address specific pedagogical and administrative challenges; and 4) address pitfalls and shortcomings of using AI in higher ed, and develop mechanisms to anticipate and respond to emerging challenges.

    Global perspectives

    DeepSeek harnesses links with Chinese universities in talent war

    Packer, H. Times Higher Education. January 31st, 2025

    The success of artificial intelligence platform DeepSeek, which was developed by a relatively young team including graduates and current students from leading Chinese universities, could encourage more students to pursue opportunities at home amid a global race for talent, experts have predicted.

    Teaching and learning

    Trends in AI for student assessment – A roller coaster ride

    MacGregor, K. University World News. January 25th, 2025

    Insights from (and recording of) the University World News webinar “Trends in AI for student assessment”, held on January 21st. 6% of audience members said that they did not face significant challenges in using GenAI for assessment, 53% identified “verifying the accuracy and validity of AI-generated results” as a challenge, 49% said they lacked training or expertise in using GenAI tools, 45% identified “difficulty integrating AI tools within current assessment systems”, 41% were challenged in addressing ethical concerns, 30% found “ensuring fairness and reducing bias in AI-based assessments” challenging, 25% identified “protecting student data privacy and security” as a challenge, and 19% said “resistance to adopting AI-driven assessment” was challenging.

    Open access

    Charting a course for open education resources in an AI era

    Wang, T. and Mishra, S. University World News. January 24th, 2025

    The digital transformation of higher education has positioned open educational resources (OER) as essential digital public goods for the global knowledge commons. As emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), reshape how educational content is created, adapted and distributed, the OER movement faces both unprecedented opportunities and significant challenges in fulfilling its mission of democratising knowledge access.

    The Dubai Declaration on OER, released after the 3rd UNESCO World OER Congress held in November 2024, addresses pressing questions about AI’s role in open education.

    Source link

  • Higher education’s outlook for 2025

    Higher education’s outlook for 2025

     If January is any indication, major changes are likely coming to the higher education sector in the year ahead. President Donald Trump has taken executive actions during the first two weeks of his second term that could have big impacts on diversity and equity initiatives, immigration and Title IX, the federal law barring sex-based discrimination in federally funded colleges. 

    But those aren’t the only shifts that colleges are facing. Many institutions are grappling with financial strains, and the year ahead could bring challenges that are difficult to plan for, such as climate disasters, federal policy changes and cybersecurity attacks. 

    This year also marks the expected peak in high school graduate numbers, between 3.8 million and 3.9 million, according to projections from the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. Colleges will need to prepare their budgets for the expected decline in these students in the years ahead — a 10.3% drop by 2041, WICHE estimates. 

    The courts could also disrupt the higher ed landscape during the year. Lawsuits working their way through the legal system have targeted everything from Biden-era regulations to the academic publishing industry. 

    Below, we’re rounding up our outlooks for 2025 to help guide higher ed leaders through the year ahead. 

    Source link

  • Idaho legislators accuse Boise State of flouting DEI ban

    Idaho legislators accuse Boise State of flouting DEI ban

    Lawmakers in Idaho accused Boise State University officials of skirting a statewide ban on diversity, equity and inclusion during a House education committee meeting Tuesday, according to reporting from Idaho Education News. 

    Republican legislators questioned Boise State president Marlene Tromp about a sociology certificate program in DEI advertised on the university’s website as well as its Institute for Advancing American Values, the latter of which is described as encouraging “respectful dialogue” about “the issues and values that have shaped America and Americans from all walks of life.”

    One representative remarked that the institute “sounds like a continuation of DEI under different labels.”

    Tromp said the university had “absolutely not moved something under another name” but added that she’d have to investigate the certificate program more closely. 

    In December, the Idaho State Board of Education passed a resolution prohibiting “central offices, policies, procedures, or initiatives … dedicated to DEI ideology” at public higher ed institutions. Boise State shuttered two of its student equity centers a week before the vote.

    Source link