Tag: Hughes

  • Higher education postcard: Hughes Hall, Cambridge

    Higher education postcard: Hughes Hall, Cambridge

    Greetings from Cambridge – and unlike last week, this time we’re definitely in England.

    It is 1878, and the Cambridge Independent Press of 7 December reports that the university has taken steps to enable the training of teachers. The Teachers’ Training Syndicate (its Cambridge-ese for a committee or working group, I think) is to be established, to oversee programmes of training for students intending to become school teachers, and the colleges at which they train.

    Image: Shutterstock

    All of this took place in the context of increased state engagement with school education: the provision of schools for all children was becoming increasingly necessary, and local authorities of various kinds (it’s complicated!) were empowered to fund such schools.

    And it stands to reason that where you have schools, you need teachers. And by then the practice of teaching was becoming increasingly professionalised. Plus, it was one of the few professions open to women.

    And so in 1885 the Cambridge Training College for Women was opened. Initially based at Newnham College, there were fourteen students, under the guidance of the college’s first principal, Elizabeth Phillips Hughes. Hughes was the first woman to gain first class honours in moral sciences at Cambridge, having studied at Newnham. (She also helped to found the Barry Teachers Training College, which ultimately became part of the University of South Wales, and helped to draft the statutes of the University of Wales). She remained principal of the new college until 1899, steering it from its modest start to a new building – that shown on the card – in 1895.

    The driving forces behind the establishment of the college included Miss Frances Buss, champion of girls’ education, and one of the subjects of an anonymous verse of some fame:

    Miss Buss and Miss Beale

    Cupid’s darts do not feel.

    How different from us

    Miss Beale and Miss Buss.

    Miss Beale was Dorothea Beale, suffragist, headmistress of Cheltenham Ladies’ College and one of the founders of St Hilda’s College, Oxford. And it seems that the pioneers of women’s education had a lot to put up with.

    At this point Hughes Hall was not a college. (It wasn’t even Hughes Hall yet!) It was only after the university recognised women as full members (in 1947, less than a lifetime ago) that the college gained recognition as part of the university (albeit not yet a college) and was renamed Hughes Hall. This was in honour of Elizabeth Phillips Hughes, the first principal; its full name at that time was Elizabeth Phillips Hughes Hall.

    It began to admit male students in 1973: the first of Cambridge’s all-women institutions to do so. In 1985 Hughes Hall became an “approved foundation” of the university (it’s the step below being a full college) and in 2006 Hughes Hall became a college of the university, with a charter and everything. And a full name – for Sunday best or when it has been naughty – of The President and Fellows of Hughes Hall in the University of Cambridge.

    Hughes Hall admits only mature students (judged by age not attitude), to both undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. It still teaches education, both as an academic subject and as a PGCE, as well as programmes across other disciplines.

    This post owes its origins to the eagle-eyed Professor Chris Brooke of Homerton, Cambridge, who corrected me about wat was shown on the card. I’d shared the card as one of my daily posts on Bluesky thinking it was Homerton. But it definitely isn’t!

    Here’s a jigsaw of the card – hope you enjoy it.

    Backstory

    A couple of you have asked about the #HigherEducationPostcard backstory.

    It started about ten years ago when I was in a Cardiff antiques mall, sheltering from the rain. One of the stalls had books and old postcards, and when browsing the latter I found half a dozen showing universities. Which I thought was quite cute. So I bought them.

    Fast forward to 2020 and the pandemic. The first few months were scary for lots of reasons, and if you were self-employed in the HE sector the question of how to do consulting without being on site was very much front and centre. And whilst sitting at my desk trying to solve this puzzle I noticed the small stack of postcards, and thought I’d share them on Twitter. They were really popular, so I thought I could carry on doing this. But where to get postcards? eBay, mostly. And so I started bidding. And then the collection sort of growed. Its at about 1200 cards now, in fifteen albums with a stack of a couple of hundred still to be scanned and filed.

    In the summer of 2020 I ran a #HigherEducationPostcard world cup on Twitter – 32 cards, paired off, the one with most votes went through to the next round. In the final, Swansea University beat van Mildert College, Durham; thousands of votes were cast, each institution getting its students, staff and alumni to join in. It was great fun!

    I’d been posting daily on Twitter, and when in summer 2021 Paul Greatrix retired from weekly Registrarism blogposts on Wonkhe, I suggested that I write a weekly higher education postcard blog. The good folk at Wonkhe towers said yes, and here we are, 170 posts later. My only rule is that I have to own the actual postcard; and I try to make them interesting and informative. And mostly true. I really enjoy writing and sharing them, and have no plans to stop just yet. I hope you like them too. Thanks for reading!

    Source link

  • Let America Be America Again (Langston Hughes)

    Let America Be America Again (Langston Hughes)

    Source link

  • Supreme Court Issues Decision Regarding Retirement Plan Fiduciary Duties in Hughes v. Northwestern – CUPA-HR

    Supreme Court Issues Decision Regarding Retirement Plan Fiduciary Duties in Hughes v. Northwestern – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | March 18, 2022

    On January 24, the Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Hughes v. Northwestern University, a case dealing with 403(b) retirement plan fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The court criticized the standard applied by the lower courts and sent the case back to the 7th Circuit to reevaluate the plaintiffs’ allegations.

    In the case, the three plaintiffs, all current or former employees of the university, alleged the plan fiduciaries violated the duty of prudence standard under ERISA by “(1) failing to monitor and control recordkeeping fees, resulting in unreasonably high costs to plan participants; (2) offering mutual funds and annuities in the form of ‘retail’ share classes that carried higher fees than those charged for otherwise identical share classes (institutional share class) of the same investments; and (3) offering investment options that were likely to confuse investors.”

    In their decision, which was written by Justice Sotomayor, the court explained that, when determining if a plan fiduciary violated the duty of prudence standard under ERISA, courts must engage in “a context-specific inquiry of the fiduciaries’ continuing duty to monitor investments and to remove imprudent ones” as articulated in Supreme Court precedent, Tibble. The court said the 7th Circuit was wrong in concluding that by providing a choice of investment options, plan fiduciaries insulated themselves from liability claims. It is important to note that the court chose not to weigh in on the plausibility of the plaintiffs’ claims, only on the standard applied by the lower courts.

    CUPA-HR, along with 17 other higher education associations, participated in an amicus brief filed in the case. In the brief, we supported the 7th Circuit’s decision in favor of Northwestern University. We explained, “The question in this case is whether petitioners have pleaded sufficient facts to state a plausible claim for breach of fiduciary duty in administering a retirement plan” under ERISA, but the complaints in this case “overlook important features of the university retirement system and ignore the discretion ERISA affords to plan fiduciaries.” We also clarified that universities and plan fiduciaries “must have the flexibility o administer the plans based upon the particular needs and preferences of the plan participants, without constant second-guessing.”

    The 7th Circuit now has the opportunity to revisit the case. It may choose to dismiss much of the case or review the record again.

    Following the decision, our amicus briefing counsel was quoted saying, “Despite some of the early headlines that have already been written suggesting this case is a really big deal, in fact, I view this as a limited ruling… [T]he Supreme Court did not reach any specific or detailed conclusions that any of the investments offered by the defendants in this case are actually inappropriate, nor did the justices come down and say a fiduciary can never offer retail shares of funds within their institutional retirement plans. Instead, what they said, in a nutshell, is that the 7th Circuit simply did not give enough consideration of the duty-to-monitor precedents set by Tibble.”

    Importantly, the final sentence of the Supreme Court’s decision provided a silver lining; “At times, the circumstances facing an ERISA fiduciary will implicate difficult tradeoffs, and courts must give due regard to the range of reasonable judgments a fiduciary may make based on her experience and expertise.” The court here is clarifying that fiduciaries must be given due deference when making tough decisions.

    That being said, the decision could pave the way for more cases on fiduciary duties to be filed, as plaintiffs’ attorneys may take advantage of the potential opening in order to force settlements.



    Source link