Tag: Higher

  • Most Students Affected by OBBBA Student Loan Changes

    Most Students Affected by OBBBA Student Loan Changes

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Feverpitched/iStock/Getty Images

    The majority of current college students—61 percent—surveyed recently say that several changes to the federal student loan system that became law earlier this summer will directly impact them, according to a new poll from U.S. News & World Report.

    The key changes that students expect to affect them include caps on how much students can borrow, the elimination of some income-based repayment plans and the end of Grad PLUS loans.

    The poll, which surveyed 1,190 graduate and undergraduate students earlier this month, asked students about what various provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would mean for them. Many respondents (38 percent) said they would have to take out private loans to balance the effects of the law, while others (35 percent) said they may not be able to finish college at all. About a quarter said they were even considering joining the military to help pay for college.

    “I wanted to go to medical school, but now I won’t,” one student wrote, according to U.S. News.

    At the same time, one in five students said they were unaware of the changes to students loans, while another 39 percent said they were “fuzzy on the details” of the OBBBA. Twenty-two percent said they understood the law but not how they will personally be affected.

    Some students also reported supporting the bill’s provisions; about one in five students said they approved, respectively, of loan caps for graduate students, caps for medical and law students, and the elimination of certain income-based repayment plans. Slightly fewer, 17 percent, approve of eliminating Grad PLUS loans.

    About 63 percent of students said they reached out to their financial aid offices for help navigating the bill’s effects, and three-quarters of those students found their financial aid offices helpful. About half of students (51 percent) also reported that their universities had been transparent about the effects of the OBBBA.

    Source link

  • Survey Shows High Graduation and Employment Rates

    Survey Shows High Graduation and Employment Rates

    College Possible’s latest alumni survey shows strong outcomes for participants in its coaching program, including a 93 percent five-year graduation rate for those who attended a four-year college and high rates of employment and job satisfaction.

    According to the report, which is based on a survey of 1,300 of the college access nonprofit’s more than 100,000 graduates, 95 percent are employed, 83 percent are employed full-time and more than four in five respondents said they felt fulfilled by their jobs.

    The salaries of College Possible graduates are also high, with half reporting salaries over $60,000. The median salary for those working in STEM fields is $101,650, while those in non-STEM careers made a median income of $46,680. Sixty-eight percent of respondents indicated they feel at least somewhat financially secure.

    The report also highlights that most of College Possible’s graduates say they benefited significantly from the coaching program, with nine in 10 saying they would recommend College Possible to others and 17 percent returning to coach other students or work for the organization in another capacity.

    Source link

  • Tex. Boards Abolish Faculty Senates, Create Toothless Councils

    Tex. Boards Abolish Faculty Senates, Create Toothless Councils

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | BraunS, malerapaso and vi73777/iStock/Getty Images

    The University of Texas System Board of Regents voted Thursday to disband the system’s long-standing faculty senates in compliance with Senate Bill 37, the sweeping Texas higher education law that gives university boards and presidents control over faculty governing bodies.

    The UT board also voted Thursday to create faculty advisory groups, which will “perform the work of faculty governance bodies”—such as reviewing degree requirements, suggesting curricular changes, coordinating campus events and revising the faculty handbook—while keeping all decision-making power in the hands of the administration.

    The University of Houston system Board of Regents did the same Thursday, voting to create faculty councils that will “provide structured, meaningful avenues for faculty to help shape academic priorities, strengthen excellence and contribute to decisions that guide our future,” a university spokesperson said in a statement.

    But the groups won’t give the faculty independent representation or any real power. In accordance with SB 37, the board bylaws now state, “a faculty council is advisory only and may not be delegated the final decision-making authority on any matter.”

    As of June 20, any faculty governing body in Texas—whether it’s a senate, council or advisory group—may not exceed 60 members unless otherwise decided by the board, and every college or school within the university must be represented by at least two members, SB 37 dictates. The university president will appoint at least one of the representatives from each college or school within the institution, while the faculty elects the others, meaning that as many as 30 members could be chosen by the president.

    The president will also choose the presiding officer, associate presiding officer and secretary for each group. Appointees may serve for six years before taking a mandatory two-year break from the group, while faculty-elected representatives may only serve for two years before the two-year break.

    While the new groups are still faculty bodies, they won’t “authentically speak with the faculty voice,” said Mark Criley, a senior program officer in the department of academic freedom, tenure and governance at the American Association of University Professors. “No matter who is selected, the process by which they’re selected matters. We learned when we’re in elementary school—the teacher didn’t appoint the class president, the principal didn’t appoint them, this was one of our first exercises in representation. You choose the people who will speak for you in an institutional body.”

    Across the state, college and university system boards are taking different approaches to scrapping and reshaping their faculty senates. The Alamo Colleges District Board of Trustees voted earlier this month to consolidate the faculty senates at each of the five campuses into one group of up to 35 members. Previously, the five senates comprised 114 voting members.

    While the Texas State University system board gave presidents the ability to create new faculty groups, it did not approve a new faculty governing body at its Aug. 14 meeting and will let the existing senate lapse on Sept. 1, the deadline set by SB 37. Texas A&M University regents are expected to vote on their approach to the new law at their Aug. 27 board meeting, The Austin American-Statesman reported.

    Even as university governing boards design their toothless, SB 37–compliant groups, two professors at the University of Houston on Monday unveiled what they’re calling the Faux Faculty Senate. “I know that people feel that faculty senates are kind of arcane … but it’s a part of civil society,” said David Mazella, an associate professor in the English Department at the University of Houston and president-elect of the faux senate. “[SB 37] is an antidemocratic bill that essentially eliminates the faculty voice in order for the state to directly control what we do.”

    The faux senate is largely symbolic; it won’t replicate any of the governing functions of the now-defunct 100-member senate, Mazella said. Instead, it will serve as an off-campus meet-up for faculty to socialize and talk about ongoing issues in Texas higher education. “Even getting to a faculty cafe is really difficult, so giving people an opportunity [to talk] that is not in a university space feels really important to us,” Mazella said.

    He and his co-creator, María González, also an associate professor of English at Houston, plan to start hosting events in October, though nothing concrete has been scheduled. Without support from the university, the money to host these events will come from Mazella’s and González’s own pockets. They’re looking for a space in the Houston area that’s “not too gross, but not too expensive,” said Mazella, for their first faux senate convening.

    Source link

  • Mizzou Calls Black 2 Class Event Example of “Discrimination”

    Mizzou Calls Black 2 Class Event Example of “Discrimination”

    For the second year in a row, a Black student group at the University of Missouri is facing pushback from administrators over their attempt to hold a back-to-school event with the word “Black” in the name.

    The Legion of Black Collegians, a long-standing Black student government at Mizzou, had planned to host the on-campus Black 2 Class Block Party this week, but the group said in a social media post Wednesday that university administrators had canceled it.

    A university spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed that Mizzou is “committed to fostering an environment free of unlawful discrimination,” and that the name of the event “suggested it was race exclusive.”

    Likewise, Mizzou President Mun Choi added in a statement that “when holding events using university facilities, student organizations must avoid excluding individuals based on race.”

    This follows a similar dispute last year, when the university changed the name of a similar LBC event from the Welcome Black BBQ to the Welcome Black and Gold BBQ, a nod to the university’s colors. This year, LBC declined to participate, letting university officials know in July.

    Student success experts and advocates for racial minority groups say the tension at Mizzou is just one example of an ongoing change in campus cultures nationwide. As various pieces of anti-DEI legislation take effect in red states and the Trump administration attempts to crack down on practices of so-called liberal indoctrination across the country, many students of color could lose access to vital hubs of cultural recognition, they say.

    “There’s no question that the political context, the messaging from this administration and the confluence of what’s happening at state levels are extremely influential for white universities, who are often public schools that take public money,” said Eric Duncan, a policy director with EdTrust. “We’re not surprised, but we’re disappointed in what’s happening to Black students at Missouri.”

    In addition to publicizing the cancellation, LBC also noted on Instagram that incidents of racism and hate speech on campus are on the rise and demanded that the institution schedule a town hall meeting within 60 days, publicly condemn racial harassment and send out an annual notification explaining the college’s antidiscrimination policies.

    “Let’s be clear,” the student group wrote. “These actions are a deliberate act of erasure … Recreational spaces for students of all identities are CRUCIAL.”

    Choi said the university “will not respond to demands.” A university spokesperson later told Inside Higher Ed that the university is “not aware of increased discrimination against Black students on campus.”

    Amaya Morgan, the current LBC president, said she met with Choi and other administrators to discuss the cancellation on Thursday afternoon—a meeting the university later said was confidential and declined to comment on.

    In an effort to avoid federal scrutiny, universities across the country have canceled events and closed diversity centers following Trump’s ban on race-based programming and activities. A federal judge recently struck down one such order from the Department of Education, but in many cases colleges have already complied. Some institutional leaders have indicated they have few good options except to keep their heads down.

    But for Morgan, the priority is for the university “to have our back.”

    “We know we can’t do anything about the block party now,” she said, adding that racially driven harassment must still be addressed. “Obviously what we’re doing to prevent discrimination right now is not working. So we’re asking, how can we work toward a solution? That is why those demands were listed out like that.”

    Colleges Put ‘a Lot at Stake’

    Decisions to close minority student centers, shut down ethnic group–based organizations and cancel culturally specific events are not new and started before Trump took office. News organizations and nonprofit groups have been tracking such actions, especially in Republican-led states, since the Supreme Court blocked the consideration of race in college admissions in 2023.

    For example, colleges in Utah closed cultural centers and the University of Iowa terminated LGBTQ+ and Latino living-learning communities. Mizzou axed its Inclusion, Diversity and Equity Division in summer 2024 along with certain race-based scholarships and first-year student success programs like the Mizzou Black Men’s and Women’s Initiatives.

    As a Black man who attended two predominantly white institutions, Duncan, of EdTrust, said that by shuttering these parts of campus life, universities are putting “a lot at stake.” For underrepresented students, many of whom are also first-generation, these programs are critical to retention and degree completion, adding that there’s evidence—anecdotal and data-based—to prove it.

    “When Black and brown students and different cultures step onto college campuses, a lot of times they’re looking for signals of inclusivity. ‘Is this a place that I belong?’” Duncan said. “Removing [these welcoming and affirming spaces] not just passively, but by coming out and saying, ‘We don’t support this,’ is a signal to people that maybe this is not a space of belonging for me.”

    Shaun Harper, a professor of education, public policy and business at the University of Southern California, echoed Duncan’s remarks. He pointed to a paper he published in 2013 that showed that it’s critical for Black students at predominantly white institutions to connect and teach one another how to navigate environments filled with microaggressions, racism and loneliness. Black student groups were key to this, the qualitative data showed.

    Harper added that just because something is run by a Black student organization doesn’t make it exclusive to other learners.

    “There’s never been a sign on the Black culture center door that says, ‘Blacks only.’ If white students, Asian students, Latino students and others, Indigenous students, wanted to come to those spaces, they were always welcome,” he said. “The reason why I’m so annoyed is that anybody who has ever attended [an event like Mizzou’s barbecue] knows that they are not discriminatory, divisive spaces. In fact, they’re spaces that are familial.”

    A History of Racial Tension

    As Mizzou’s LBC once again draws attention to what they call a lack of representation on campus, the university is also approaching the 10-year anniversary of protests that rocked the campus and made national headlines in November 2015.

    One student went on a hunger strike to draw attention to racism on campus, and other students camped out on the quad in solidarity. Eventually, the football team joined the efforts. The strike ended when two university leaders resigned on the same day.

    When Inside Higher Ed asked university administrators how they had addressed the campus climate since then, university spokesperson Christopher Ave said, “It is difficult to accurately measure the campus climate.” But he pointed to a record number of applications from prospective students, the increase in the percentage of underrepresented students and an improved retention rate on campus—all of which, he said, “illustrate that students want to attend and continue their education at the University of Missouri.”

    Ave added that calling off the block party doesn’t mean that the university also considers its Black cultural center or LBC as examples of discrimination.

    “This decision was based on the circumstances of this event, which was promoted with a name that suggested it was race exclusive and contrary to [federal civil rights law],” he said. “Each event or program must be considered on its own in context and the decision on this event does not dictate what will happen in any other circumstance.”

    Morgan from LBC declined to comment on whether they were seeking aid from outside groups to hold events like the block party off campus. The primary goal, she said, is to “protect the safety of Black students moving forward.”

    “I’ll be honest, I don’t have a very clear path forward, but I know that as a Legion, we will still continue to do whatever we can to make sure that students are heard and make sure that our identities are heard and seen,” she said. “As a Legion, we have existed for nearly 60 years. Excuse my language, but there’s absolutely no way in hell that we [will] go, especially not under my watch.”



    Source link

  • Mizzou Calls Black 2 Class Event Example of “Discrimination”

    Mizzou Calls Black 2 Class Event Example of “Discrimination”

    For the second year in a row, a Black student group at the University of Missouri is facing pushback from administrators over their attempt to hold a back-to-school event with the word “Black” in the name.

    The Legion of Black Collegians, a long-standing Black student government at Mizzou, had planned to host the on-campus Black 2 Class Block Party this week, but the group said in a social media post Wednesday that university administrators had canceled it.

    A university spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed that Mizzou is “committed to fostering an environment free of unlawful discrimination,” and that the name of the event “suggested it was race exclusive.”

    Likewise, Mizzou President Mun Choi added in a statement that “when holding events using university facilities, student organizations must avoid excluding individuals based on race.”

    This follows a similar dispute last year, when the university changed the name of a similar LBC event from the Welcome Black BBQ to the Welcome Black and Gold BBQ, a nod to the university’s colors. This year, LBC declined to participate, letting university officials know in July.

    Student success experts and advocates for racial minority groups say the tension at Mizzou is just one example of an ongoing change in campus cultures nationwide. As various pieces of anti-DEI legislation take effect in red states and the Trump administration attempts to crack down on practices of so-called liberal indoctrination across the country, many students of color could lose access to vital hubs of cultural recognition, they say.

    “There’s no question that the political context, the messaging from this administration and the confluence of what’s happening at state levels are extremely influential for white universities, who are often public schools that take public money,” said Eric Duncan, a policy director with EdTrust. “We’re not surprised, but we’re disappointed in what’s happening to Black students at Missouri.”

    In addition to publicizing the cancellation, LBC also noted on Instagram that incidents of racism and hate speech on campus are on the rise and demanded that the institution schedule a town hall meeting within 60 days, publicly condemn racial harassment and send out an annual notification explaining the college’s antidiscrimination policies.

    “Let’s be clear,” the student group wrote. “These actions are a deliberate act of erasure … Recreational spaces for students of all identities are CRUCIAL.”

    Choi said the university “will not respond to demands.” A university spokesperson later told Inside Higher Ed that the university is “not aware of increased discrimination against Black students on campus.”

    Amaya Morgan, the current LBC president, said she met with Choi and other administrators to discuss the cancellation on Thursday afternoon—a meeting the university later said was confidential and declined to comment on.

    In an effort to avoid federal scrutiny, universities across the country have canceled events and closed diversity centers following Trump’s ban on race-based programming and activities. A federal judge recently struck down one such order from the Department of Education, but in many cases colleges have already complied. Some institutional leaders have indicated they have few good options except to keep their heads down.

    But for Morgan, the priority is for the university “to have our back.”

    “We know we can’t do anything about the block party now,” she said, adding that racially driven harassment must still be addressed. “Obviously what we’re doing to prevent discrimination right now is not working. So we’re asking, how can we work toward a solution? That is why those demands were listed out like that.”

    Colleges Put ‘a Lot at Stake’

    Decisions to close minority student centers, shut down ethnic group–based organizations and cancel culturally specific events are not new and started before Trump took office. News organizations and nonprofit groups have been tracking such actions, especially in Republican-led states, since the Supreme Court blocked the consideration of race in college admissions in 2023.

    For example, colleges in Utah closed cultural centers and the University of Iowa terminated LGBTQ+ and Latino living-learning communities. Mizzou axed its Inclusion, Diversity and Equity Division in summer 2024 along with certain race-based scholarships and first-year student success programs like the Mizzou Black Men’s and Women’s Initiatives.

    As a Black man who attended two predominantly white institutions, Duncan, of EdTrust, said that by shuttering these parts of campus life, universities are putting “a lot at stake.” For underrepresented students, many of whom are also first-generation, these programs are critical to retention and degree completion, adding that there’s evidence—anecdotal and data-based—to prove it.

    “When Black and brown students and different cultures step onto college campuses, a lot of times they’re looking for signals of inclusivity. ‘Is this a place that I belong?’” Duncan said. “Removing [these welcoming and affirming spaces] not just passively, but by coming out and saying, ‘We don’t support this,’ is a signal to people that maybe this is not a space of belonging for me.”

    Shaun Harper, a professor of education, public policy and business at the University of Southern California, echoed Duncan’s remarks. He pointed to a paper he published in 2013 that showed that it’s critical for Black students at predominantly white institutions to connect and teach one another how to navigate environments filled with microaggressions, racism and loneliness. Black student groups were key to this, the qualitative data showed.

    Harper added that just because something is run by a Black student organization doesn’t make it exclusive to other learners.

    “There’s never been a sign on the Black culture center door that says, ‘Blacks only.’ If white students, Asian students, Latino students and others, Indigenous students, wanted to come to those spaces, they were always welcome,” he said. “The reason why I’m so annoyed is that anybody who has ever attended [an event like Mizzou’s barbecue] knows that they are not discriminatory, divisive spaces. In fact, they’re spaces that are familial.”

    A History of Racial Tension

    As Mizzou’s LBC once again draws attention to what they call a lack of representation on campus, the university is also approaching the 10-year anniversary of protests that rocked the campus and made national headlines in November 2015.

    One student went on a hunger strike to draw attention to racism on campus, and other students camped out on the quad in solidarity. Eventually, the football team joined the efforts. The strike ended when two university leaders resigned on the same day.

    When Inside Higher Ed asked university administrators how they had addressed the campus climate since then, university spokesperson Christopher Ave said, “It is difficult to accurately measure the campus climate.” But he pointed to a record number of applications from prospective students, the increase in the percentage of underrepresented students and an improved retention rate on campus—all of which, he said, “illustrate that students want to attend and continue their education at the University of Missouri.”

    Ave added that calling off the block party doesn’t mean that the university also considers its Black cultural center or LBC as examples of discrimination.

    “This decision was based on the circumstances of this event, which was promoted with a name that suggested it was race exclusive and contrary to [federal civil rights law],” he said. “Each event or program must be considered on its own in context and the decision on this event does not dictate what will happen in any other circumstance.”

    Morgan from LBC declined to comment on whether they were seeking aid from outside groups to hold events like the block party off campus. The primary goal, she said, is to “protect the safety of Black students moving forward.”

    “I’ll be honest, I don’t have a very clear path forward, but I know that as a Legion, we will still continue to do whatever we can to make sure that students are heard and make sure that our identities are heard and seen,” she said. “As a Legion, we have existed for nearly 60 years. Excuse my language, but there’s absolutely no way in hell that we [will] go, especially not under my watch.”



    Source link

  • SCOTUS Says NIH Doesn’t Have to Restore Canceled Grants

    SCOTUS Says NIH Doesn’t Have to Restore Canceled Grants

    iStock Editorial/Getty Images Plus

    The United States Supreme Court is allowing the National Institutes of Health to cut nearly $800 million in grants, though it left the door open for the researchers to seek relief elsewhere.

    In a 5-to-4 decision issued Thursday, the court paused a Massachusetts district court judge’s June decision to reinstate grants that were terminated because they didn’t align with the NIH’s new ideological priorities. Most of the canceled grants mentioned diversity, equity and inclusion goals; gender identity; COVID; and other topics the Trump administration has banned funding for. The district judge, in ruling against the administration, said he’d “never seen racial discrimination by the government like this.”

    Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the district court “likely lacked jurisdiction to hear challenges to the grant terminations, which belong in the Court of Federal Claims,” with which Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito Jr., Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh agreed.

    “The reason is straightforward,” Kavanaugh wrote. “The core of plaintiffs’ suit alleges that the government unlawfully terminated their grants. That is a breach of contract claim. And under the Tucker Act, such claims must be brought in the Court of Federal Claims, not federal district court.”

    The court’s emergency order came after more than a dozen Democratic attorneys general and groups representing university researchers challenged the terminations in federal court.

    “We are very disappointed by the Supreme Court’s ruling that our challenge to the sweeping termination of hundreds of critical biomedical research grants likely belongs in the Court of Federal Claims,” the American Civil Liberties Union, which is part of the legal team that is suing the NIH over the grant terminations, wrote in a statement Thursday evening. “This decision is a significant setback for public health. We are assessing our options but will work diligently to ensure that these unlawfully terminated grants continue to be restored.”

    Earlier this month, higher education associations and others urged the court to uphold the district court’s order, arguing that the terminations have “squandered” government resources and halted potentially lifesaving research.

    “The magnitude of NIH’s recent actions is unprecedented, and the agency’s abrupt shift from its longstanding commitments to scientific advancement has thrown the research community into disarray,” the groups wrote in an Aug. 1 brief. “This seismic shock to the NIH research landscape has had immediate and devastating effects, and granting a stay here will ensure that the reverberations will be felt for years to come.”

    Chief Justice John Roberts, who often sides with the conservative justices, joined liberal justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in a dissent.

    “By today’s order, an evenly divided Court neuters judicial review of grant terminations by sending plaintiffs on a likely futile, multivenue quest for complete relief,” Jackson wrote. “Neither party to the case suggested this convoluted procedural outcome, and no prior court has held that the law requires it.”

    However, Barrett joined Roberts, Jackson, Sotomayor and Kagan in agreeing that the district court can review NIH’s reasoning for the terminations, and the justices kept in place a court order blocking the guidance that led to cancellations.

    “It is important to note that the Supreme Court declined to stay the District Court’s conclusion that the NIH’s directives were unreasonable and unlawful,” the ACLU said in a statement. “This means that NIH cannot terminate any research studies based on these unlawful directives.”

    Source link

  • More UChicago Ph.D. Programs Will Pause Admissions

    More UChicago Ph.D. Programs Will Pause Admissions

    Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu/Getty Images

    The University of Chicago’s Arts and Humanities Division is now pausing new Ph.D. student admissions for the 2026–27 academic year across all departments except philosophy and one program within the music department. The move expands on last week’s announcement from the dean that about half of all departments would pause admissions, while the rest would reduce the number of admissions.

    The departments that won’t be accepting Ph.D. students now include art history, cinema and media studies, classics, comparative literature, East Asian languages and civilizations, English language and literature, Germanic studies, linguistics, Middle Eastern studies, Romance languages and literatures, Slavic languages and literatures, and South Asian languages and civilizations, plus the music department’s ethnomusicology and history and theory of music programs.

    The Social Sciences Division has also announced it will not admit Ph.D. students into four programs in 2026-27: anthropology, political economy, social thought, and conceptual and historical studies of science. The UChicago Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy and Practice had earlier announced it was pausing Ph.D. admissions and the Harris School of Public Policy said it was pausing admissions for the Harris Ph.D. (in public policy studies), the political economy Ph.D. and the master of arts in public policy with certificate in research methods.

    The announcements reflect how the deeply indebted university is responding to budget issues. But UChicago is just one of multiple highly selective universities—including Boston University and the University of Pennsylvania—that have announced over the past year that they were freezing or scaling back Ph.D. admissions and programs amid financial pressures and other factors.

    UChicago had formed committees of faculty and staff to plan over the summer for changes within the Arts and Humanities Division. But on Aug. 12, division dean Deborah Nelson announced the initial pause, stressing that “this decision is not the recommendation of any committee.”

    Then on Wednesday, Nelson wrote a new email, obtained by Inside Higher Ed, announcing a revised plan “based on the strong recommendation of the PhD committee and department chairs.”

    “After the announcement last week, I met with all department chairs and consulted with the faculty-led committee on PhD programs,” Nelson wrote. “Nearly all faculty leadership agreed that instead of admitting students to only a select number of departments, they preferred a broader pause for the division so we can spend time this coming year to collectively assess and better navigate the challenges we face.”

    A department chair who asked not to be named confirmed to Inside Higher Ed that chairs met with the dean last Friday to discuss the pause, and most department chairs agreed it should be applied throughout the division to allow for more collaborative work during the academic year on the future of Ph.D. education at UChicago.

    Nelson also wrote in her Wednesday email that she “heard from many faculty that the initial decision caught them off guard. The timing of my initial announcement about PhD cohorts was partly driven by deadlines to submit information to software platforms that would have made semi-public our decisions to open or close applications to programs. And I wanted to make sure our community knew about these decisions first.”

    In an email, a university spokesperson simply said, “As Dean Nelson noted in her email, the decision to revise the plan for PhD admissions in the Arts & Humanities Division for academic year 2026-27 was based on the strong recommendation of the PhD committee and department chairs. Crown, Harris and SSD have also made announcements regarding pauses in PhD admissions for the 2026-2027 academic year.”

    Clifford Ando, the Robert O. Anderson Distinguished Service Professor of Classics, History and the College, told Inside Higher Ed Thursday that “we easily have the resources to support the humanities without inflicting cuts disproportionate to the humanities’ role in creating the financial crisis.”

    “We are in the unique position of being a well-resourced university that has been so reckless with our resources that we now have to make decisions as if we were a poor one,” Ando said.

    Source link

  • Humanizing Higher Ed Data: The Strategic Power of Student Digital Twins

    Humanizing Higher Ed Data: The Strategic Power of Student Digital Twins

    Higher education institutions are overflowing with data, yet many still struggle to turn that information into actionable insight. With systems siloed across admissions, academics, student support, and alumni relations, it’s hard to get a clear picture of the student journey — let alone use that data to enhance engagement or predict outcomes.

    Enter the “digital twin”: a transformative framework that helps institutions centralize, contextualize, and humanize student data. More than a dashboard or data warehouse, a student digital twin creates a living, dynamic model that reflects how students interact with your institution in real time. It’s the difference between looking at data and understanding a student.

    The data disconnect holding higher ed back

    Disconnected data is one of the most persistent obstacles facing colleges and universities. Key information is often trapped in different systems — student information systems (SIS), learning management systems (LMS), customer relationship management (CRM) tools, financial aid platforms, and more.

    This fragmentation makes it difficult to:

    • Personalize student communications
    • Identify at-risk students in time to intervene
    • Support seamless transfers or cross-departmental collaboration
    • Harness emerging technologies like generative AI

    The result? Missed opportunities, inefficient outreach, and limited visibility into student experiences.

    Demystifying the student digital twin

    A digital twin is a virtual representation of a physical entity. In higher education, that entity is the student. The student digital twin brings together behavioral, academic, and operational data to create a comprehensive, contextual profile of each learner.

    Unlike a static dashboard or data warehouse, a digital twin captures relationships, sequences, and interactions. It enables institutions to:

    • Visualize student journeys across systems
    • Model future scenarios
    • Generate predictive insights
    • Power real-time personalization

    Most importantly, a digital twin humanizes data by shifting the focus from systems to students.

    What makes it work: The Connected Core® architecture

    At Collegis, the digital twin is powered by Connected Core — a composable, cloud-native platform built specifically for higher education. The architecture includes:

    • Integrated data fabric: A higher ed-specific data layer that unifies SIS, LMS, CRM, and more.
    • Packaged business capabilities: Modular features like lead scoring, advising nudges, and financial aid workflows.
    • Composable platform: A low-code development environment that allows institutions to customize workflows and experiences.

    Together, these elements create an agile foundation for digital transformation and continuous improvement.

    Ready for a Smarter Way Forward?

    Higher ed is hard — but you don’t have to figure it out alone. We can help you transform challenges into opportunities.

    Use cases that drive institutional impact

    Digital twins aren’t theoretical. They’re already delivering measurable value across the student lifecycle. With real implementations across enrollment, student success, and digital engagement, Collegis partners are proving just how powerful a connected data foundation can be.

    These examples show how the digital twin moves from concept to impact:

    • AI lead prioritization: By integrating digital journey signals with CRM intelligence, one partner increased inquiry-to-appointment conversion by 38%.
    • Transfer credit evaluation: AI-driven transcript assessments delivered >85% accuracy in early evaluations, reducing friction for prospective students.
    • AI-powered website search: Semantic search functionality improved engagement by 250% during pilot testing, enhancing conversion potential.

    These outcomes demonstrate how digital twins don’t just aggregate data — they activate it.

    Implementation, integration, and ROI

    One common question we encounter about this concept is, “Can’t we do this with our own data warehouse?” The answer is not really.

    Data warehouses are optimized for reporting, not real-time personalization. The digital twin’s networked model is designed for operational use, enabling advisors, marketers, and faculty to act in the moment.

    Collegis typically helps institutions realize value within three to six months. Whether starting with a marketing use case or building a full student model, we work with partners to:

    • Identify quick wins
    • Integrate priority data sources
    • Build a data model tailored to their institution

    Why Collegis — and why now?

    Unlike generic analytics platforms, Connected Core is purpose-built for higher education. It’s not a retrofitted enterprise tool. The following features make it unique from other offerings:

    • AI-native and human-centered: It’s designed to deliver explainable, actionable insights.
    • Composed, not constrained: It’s flexible enough to integrate with legacy systems and custom-built tools.
    • A strategic partnership: Collegis provides not just the technology, but the advisory services and data talent to ensure sustained success.

    Start humanizing your student data

    The digital twin helps institutions shift from reactive reporting to proactive engagement. It empowers colleges and universities to not only understand their students better, but to serve them more effectively.

    Ready to explore how a student digital twin could transform your data strategy? Contact us to request a demo!

    Innovation Starts Here

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

    Source link

  • Speed Checks

    Speed Checks

    Should a student be allowed to take the same class five or six times without someone intervening?

    An older school of community college thought used to refer to the “right to fail.” It was a version of tough love, combined with a libertarian sense that students know best what they need. If someone needs to fail calculus several times to figure out that engineering might not be the path for them, this camp would say, then so be it. Sometimes the ninth time is the charm. Failure may be the best teacher, but sometimes even the best teacher needs some repetition to get the point across.

    Early in my career, I was sympathetic to this viewpoint. After all, it applies in many other spheres of endeavor. For example, it became brutally clear at a young age that professional baseball was not in my future; I indulged my right to fail nearly every time I swung a bat. Crashing out as hard as I did, as early as I did, spared me the frustration that many players feel later in life when they top out in the minor leagues but keep trying to redeem years of sunk cost. Sales positions involve rapid and frequent failure. Actors and comedians know well what it is to crater an audition or to bomb in front of a crowd. Learning what doesn’t work is part of learning what does. Why should academia be any different? Besides, some people are late bloomers, and community colleges are all about second chances.

    Two things changed my mind. The first was getting to know students better. The second was changes to federal financial aid.

    Students clued me in over time, each in different ways. For a couple of years in grad school, I worked a few hours a week in the campus writing center as a tutor. I remember working with a student on a draft of her paper; the paper was full of grammatical mistakes, awkward constructions, abrupt transitions and the various signs of an uncomfortable writer.

    As we discussed each type of mistake, she got flustered, saying that she knew what she did wrong, but she didn’t know why. To prove her point, she showed me a note she had written her friend earlier that day. The note wasn’t eloquent, but it was clear, readable and effective; in other words, it was everything the paper wasn’t. When I asked her what the difference was, she replied that she actually cared about the note.

    Aha!

    What looked like a lack of ability or knowledge was actually a sign of indifference. When she cared, she was perfectly capable of writing reasonably well. The paper felt forced because it was forced.

    What’s true at the assignment level can be true at the course level, too. It’s hard to do well in a class you don’t care about.

    But sometimes students get stuck in ruts. (We all do, for that matter.) Tunnel vision can set in, and they might not see an alternative to the path they’re on. That’s when another set of eyes can make a difference.

    Years ago, when we still had in-person registration, a student came to me to get permission to take a course for the fourth time. When I asked why he failed it the first three times, he responded that he hated it. I asked why he wanted to retake a class he hated. He responded that it was a requirement. But it wasn’t, I pointed out; it was only a requirement for one major, and we had other majors. He looked puzzled.

    I asked if he’d had a class he liked. He mentioned liking a psych class. I told him that we had a psych major and showed what he would need to do to graduate with that. His entire demeanor changed. About a year later, he and his girlfriend stopped by my office to thank me; his entire outlook had changed, and he was on a track he enjoyed. He always had the native ability—he just needed someone to point out that there was another option. Human intervention wasn’t about stopping or scolding, it was about pointing out an option that hadn’t occurred to him.

    Later, of course, feds lowered the lifetime limit for Pell eligibility. Suddenly, spending multiple semesters on the same class made it much less likely that a student would finish at all. Whatever the merits of that policy change, its impact is real. Before a student burns through too much aid, I think we have an obligation to interrupt the spiral and see if there’s a more productive path.

    That view lacks the simple clarity of “the right to fail,” but I think it comes closer to reflecting the world in which students live. Speed checks save lives, and check-ins save careers. I’d rather have someone intervene than watch the student keep hitting their head against the wall, only to (eventually) walk away with student loans and nothing to show for them.

    Source link

  • Helping College Students Emotionally Before They Turn to AI

    Helping College Students Emotionally Before They Turn to AI

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Kirillm/iStock/Getty Images

    As more students engage with generative artificial intelligence and chat bots, the ways they use AI are changing. A 2025 report published by the Harvard Business Review found that, according to the discourse on social media, “therapy/companionship” is the No. 1 use case for generative AI chat bots.

    For college counseling centers, this change reflects students’ desire for immediate support. “This is not a generation that would call a counseling center and get an appointment two weeks, four weeks later,” said Joy Himmell, director of counseling services for Old Dominion University. “They want help when they want it.”

    But it’s important for counseling centers to educate students on the risks of using generative AI tools for well-being support, Himmell said.

    The research: While ChatGPT and similar text-generating chat bots are touted as productivity tools that can expedite learning and workflow, some people turn to them for personal and emotional support.

    According to a 2024 safety report, OpenAI found that some users experience anthropomorphization—attributing humanlike behaviors and characteristics to nonhuman entities—and form social relationships with the AI. Researchers hypothesized that humanlike socialization with an AI model could affect how individuals interact with other people and hamper building healthy relationship skills.

    A 2025 study from MIT Media Lab and Open AI found that high usage of ChatGPT correlates with increased dependency on the AI tool, with heavy users more likely to consider ChatGPT a “friend” and to consider messaging with ChatGPT more comfortable than face-to-face interactions. However, researchers noted that only a small share of ChatGPT users are affected to that extent or report emotional distress from excessive use.

    Another study from the same groups found that higher daily usage of ChatGPT correlated with increased loneliness, dependence and problematic use of the tool, as well as lower socialization with other humans.

    In extreme cases, individuals have created entirely fabricated lives and romantic relationships with AI, which can result in deep feelings and real hurt when the technology is updated.

    This research shows that most people, even heavy users of ChatGPT, are not seeking emotional support from the chat bot and do not become dependent on it. Among college students, a minority want AI to provide well-being support, according to a different survey. A study from WGU Labs found that 41 percent of online learners would be comfortable with AI suggesting mental health strategies based on a student’s data, compared to 38 percent who said they would be somewhat or very uncomfortable with such use.

    In higher education: On campus, Himmell has seen a growing number of students start counseling for anxiety disorders, depression and a history of trauma. Students are also notably lonelier, she said, and less likely to engage with peers on campus or attend events.

    Student mental health is a top retention concern, but few counseling centers have capacity to provide one-on-one support to everyone who needs it. At her center, more students prefer in-person counseling sessions, which Himmell attributes to them wanting to feel more grounded and connected. But many still engage with online or digital interventions as well.

    A significant number of colleges have established partnerships with digital mental health service providers to complement in-person services, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote instruction. Such services could include counseling support or skill-building education to reduce the need for intensive in-person counseling.

    Digital mental health resources cannot replace some forms of therapy or risk assessment, Himmell said, but they can augment counseling sessions. “Having automated AI systems with emotional intelligence to be able to convey some of those concepts and work with students, in some ways, it actually frees the counselor in terms of doing that kind of [skill building], so that we can get more into the nitty-gritty of what we need to talk about,” she explained.

    AI counseling or online engagement with ChatGPT is not a solution to all problems, Himmell said. For those who use chat bots as companions, “it sets up a system that is not based in reality; it’s a facade,” Himmell said. “Even though that can serve a purpose, in the long run, it really doesn’t bode well for emotional or social skill development.”

    Faculty and staff need to learn how to identify students at risk of developing AI dependency. Compared to anxiety or depression, which have more visible cues in the classroom, “the symptomology related to that inner world of AI and not engaging with others in ways that are helpful is much more benign,” Himmell said. Campus stakeholders can watch out for students who are disengaged socially or reluctant to engage in group work to help identify social isolation and possible digital dependency.

    AI in the counseling center: Part of addressing student AI dependency is becoming familiar with the tools and helping students learn to use them appropriately, Himmell said. “We need to be able to harness it and use it, not be afraid of it, and embrace it,” she said. She also sees a role for counseling centers and others in higher education to provide additional education on AI in different formats and venues.

    Old Dominion partners with TalkCampus, which offers 24-7 peer-based support. The counseling service is not automated, but the platform uses AI to mine the data and identify risk factors that may come up in conversation and provide support if needed.

    Source link