Tag: Improve

  • Five Science-Backed Ways to Improve Academic Writing (opinion)

    Five Science-Backed Ways to Improve Academic Writing (opinion)

    I vividly recall when an editor in chief invited me to publish in a well-known journal. Fresh from defending my dissertation, I still grappled with understanding how publishing worked in academia—like whether I should try to imitate the densely written, abstract sentences that appeared in the journal he edited. I thumbed the latest issue and looked at him. “Do you have a house style I should use?”

    He shuddered and gave a response I’ve since heard echoed by other editors in chief of similarly well-respected journals: “Please don’t! We publish manuscripts despite how they’re written.”

    But this candid advice leaves most graduate students and even seasoned faculty members with another dilemma. If you can’t imitate articles published in the best journals, how do you write up your research so it gets published?

    During my early years of teaching writing courses, I discovered that students seldom revised their work significantly, even when they received extensive feedback from both me and their peers. In fact, students failed to revise even when they received feedback and grades from their peers.

    All writing students also struggle with the idea that both feedback and grades on their writing are subjective, a reflection of how a particular instructor prefers students to write in a specific course. In addition, English literature and creative writing courses teach students that writing is a combination of mystery and art.

    In contrast, researchers in cognitive neuroscience and psycholinguistics identified the features that make sentences easy or difficult to read decades ago. As a result, we can teach students how to make their sentences clear—no matter how complex the subject—by teaching science-based writing methods. And as a graduate student or faculty member, you can improve your own academic writing—and your chances for publication—by focusing on the five basic principles that cause readers to perceive sentences as clear.

    1. Active voice makes sentences easier to read.

    In studies, researchers have discovered that readers comprehend sentences more rapidly when sentences reflect cause and effect. We can trace this to two factors. First, our brains naturally perceive cause and effect, which evolved as a survival mechanism. Research shows, for instance, that infants as young as 6 months old may identify cause and effect.

    Second, English sentence structure reflects causes and effects in its ordering of words: subject-verb-object. As researchers discovered, participants read sentences with active voice at speeds one-third faster than they read sentences in passive voice. Moreover, these same participants misunderstood even simple sentences in passive voice about one-quarter of the time. While many writing instructors require students to use active voice, few alert students to the specific benefits of active sentences that make them easier to read. These sentences are shorter, more efficient and more concrete, while sharpening readers’ sense of cause and effect.

    Consider the differences between the first example below, which relies on passive voice, and the second, which uses active voice.

    Passive: It has been reported that satiety may be induced by the distention of the gastric antrum due to the release of dissolved gas from carbonated water, which may improve gastric motility, thereby reducing hunger.

    Active: Cuomo, Savarese, Sarnelli et al. reported that drinking carbonated water distends the gastric antrum through the release of dissolved gas, inducing satiety and improving gastric motility, all of which reduce hunger.

    1. Actors or concrete objects turn sentences into microstories.

    Academic writing naturally tackles complex content that can prove challenging even to subject matter experts. However, writers can make even challenging content comprehensible to nonexperts by making cause and effect clear in their sentences by using nouns that readers can easily identify as subjects. When the grammatical subjects in sentences are nouns clearly capable of performing actions, readers process sentences with greater speed and less effort. For actors, use people, organizations or publications—any individual, group or item created with intention that generates impact.

    We unconsciously perceive these sentences as easier to read and recall because identifying actors and actions in sentences aids readers in fixing both a word’s meaning and the role it plays in sentence structure. Furthermore, these nouns enhance the efficiency of any sentence by paring down its words. Take these examples below:

    Abstract noun as subject: Virginia Woolf’s examination of the social and economic obstacles female writers faced, due to the presumption that women had no place in literary professions and so were instead relegated to the household, particularly resonated with her audience of young women who had struggled to fight for their right to study at their colleges, even after the political successes of the suffragettes.

    Actor as subject: In A Room of One’s Own, Virginia Woolf examined social and economic obstacles female writers faced. Despite the political success of the suffragettes, writers like Woolf battled the perception that women had no place in the literary professions. Thus Woolf’s book resonated with her audience, young women who had to fight for the right to study at their colleges.

    1. Pronouns send readers backward, but readers make sense of sentences by anticipating what comes next.

    If writers imitate the academic writing they see in print, they typically rely on pronouns as the subjects of sentences, especially “this,” “that,” “these,” “those” and “it.” However, pronouns save writers time but cost readers significantly, for two reasons.

    First, readers typically assume that pronouns refer to a single noun rather than a cluster of nouns, a phrase or even an entire sentence. Second, when writers use these pronouns without nouns to anchor their meaning, readers slow down and frequently misidentify the meanings of pronouns. Moreover, readers rated writing samples with higher numbers of pronouns as less well-written than sentences that relied on actors as subjects—or even pronouns like “this” anchored by nouns like “outcome.”

    Pronoun as subject: Due to the potential confounding detrimental effects of sulfonylureas and insulin in the comparator arms of the trials evaluating anticancer effects of metformin/thiazolidinediones, it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions from prior studies.

    Actor as subject: In trials to assess the anticancer effects of metformin/thiazolidinediones, we had difficulty drawing any firm conclusions from prior studies due to potential confounding detrimental effects from sulfonylureas and insulin.

    1. Action verbs make sentences more concrete, efficient and memorable.

    Open any newspaper or magazine and, even in just-the-facts-ma’am hard news stories, you’ll find action verbs, like “argues,” “reinvents,” “writes” and “remakes.” In contrast, most writers overrely on nonaction verbs. These verbs include “is,” “has been,” “seems,” “appears,” “becomes,” “represents” and that evergreen staple of academic writing, “tends.”

    Action verbs enable readers to immediately identify verbs, a process central to comprehending sentence structure and understanding meaning alike. Furthermore, action verbs make sentences more efficient, more concrete and more memorable. In one study of verbs and memory, readers recalled concrete verbs more accurately than nonaction verbs.

    When we read action verbs, our brains recruit the sensory-motor system, generating faster reaction times than with abstract or nonaction verbs, which are processed outside that system. Even in patients with dementia, action verbs remain among words patients with advanced disease can identify due to the semantic richness of connections action verbs recruit in the brain.

    Nonaction verbs: Claiming the promotion of research “excellence” and priding oneself in the record of “excellence” has become commonplace, but what this excellence is concretely about is unclear.

    Action verbs: Research institutions claim to promote faculty on the basis of research “excellence,” but institutions define “excellence” in many ways, with few clear definitions.

    1. Place subjects and verbs close together.

    When we read, we understand sentences’ meaning based on our predictions of how sentences unfold. We unconsciously make these predictions from our encounters with thousands of sentences. Most important, these predictions rely on our ability to identify grammatical subjects and verbs.

    We make these predictions easily when writers place subjects and verbs close together. In contrast, we struggle when writers separate subjects and verbs. With each increase in distance between subjects and verbs, readers exert greater effort, while reading speeds slow down. More strikingly, readers also make more errors in identifying subjects and verbs with increases in the number of words between subjects and verbs—even in relatively short sentences.

    For example, in this sentence, readers must stumble through two adjective clauses, noted in orange below, before encountering the verb “decreases,” paired with the underlined subject, “rule”:

    Specifically, a rule that indicates a reduction in delay that precedes an aversive consequence decreases procrastination in university students.

    But this separation strains working memory, as readers rely on subject-verb-object order to identify sentence structure. Ironically, as academic writers gain sophistication in their subject-matter expertise, they frustrate readers’ mechanisms for comprehension. Your urge to immediately modify the subject of your sentence with phrases and clauses slows reading and increases readers’ sense of conscious effort.

    On the other hand, reading speeds increase while effort decreases when subjects and verbs appear close together. Introduce your main point with a subject and verb, then modify them with clauses or phrases:

    Specifically, university students decrease procrastination when they face aversive consequences immediately for failure to meet deadlines.

    These principles will work in any discipline, enabling writers to control how editors and peer reviewers respond to their manuscripts and proposals. These changes can help make an academic career successful, crucial in today’s competitive environment.

    Yellowlees Douglas is a former professor of English at Holy Names University and was a director of five writing programs at universities including the City University of New York and the University of Florida. She is the author, most recently, of Writing for the Reader’s Brain: A Science-Based Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2024).

    Source link

  • 3 Tips to Improve Student Mental Health

    3 Tips to Improve Student Mental Health

    Reading Time: 3 minutes

    This post is a modified version of an article that originally appeared on the Cengage EMEA “Unstoppable Minds Blog.”

    As Mental Health Awareness Month comes to a close, we’re highlighting insights from someone who’s been in students’ shoes. While studying psychology at Queen Mary University of London and serving as a Cengage EMEA Student Ambassador, Roya Mohamed shared three simple but powerful tips to help students take care of their mental health.

    I remember my first year at university. All of the new friends I made, the exciting modules I took, the societies I joined, my first time living away from home, learning how to cook and how to save money. It was such an exciting time full of adventure and new beginnings. I learned so much about myself and the world of adulthood. However, I also remember the all-nighters, the breakdowns, the tears, the times I almost gave up, the sacrifices I made and the feelings of loneliness and exhaustion I had. Being a student is not easy I would know — and the increasing academic and societal pressures cause a strain on our precious mental health. Being thrown into the deep end during my first year caused my mental health to plummet and I fell into a deep depression where I had to go to therapy. It was a bleak time in my life and for a while I didn’t know how to get out of the negative cycle I was in. But I did — hooray! There were a couple of changes I made to my daily routine that notably improved my wellbeing and stopped me from ever going back to that period of darkness. Follow these steps to start taking control of your mental health and wellbeing:

    1. Scheduling

    Not having a daily schedule can leave students feeling overwhelmed and unprepared. This can cause feelings of stress which can contribute to poor mental health. Planning time for revision, relaxation, hobbies, friends, family and sleep really helped to create a routine in my life and to avoid the anxiety I used to have about completing everything on my to-do listHowever, it will take time to adapt and follow a routine. But having a structure to your life will make you feel less worried and we all know that worrying does us no good.

    1. Positive self-talk

    This is a psychological strategy that you can use to increase your self-esteem, confidence, self-love and positivity. How do you do it? The clue is in the name! This technique involves talking positively to yourself, praising your achievements no matter how big or small they are and motivating yourself with words of affirmation. Being kind to oneself is a crucial step to maintaining good mental health. For example, when I received a grade that I wasn’t happy with, I would say to myself, “Roya, that was a very difficult exam and you still scored above the class average, you should be really proud of yourself!” At first it felt weird doing this, but you begin to internalize the thoughts and quickly realize how good it makes you feel!

    1. Sleep

    We all know that students have a tricky relationship with sleep. It is recommended that university students sleep for 7-9 hours a night. This can prevent you from feeling fatigued, sleepy, having low concentration levels and becoming irritable. However, we commonly see students pulling “all-nighters” where they sleep very little — or not at all — in order to complete an academic task. I don’t recommend this at all. When it comes to revising, all-nighters are practically useless. This is because our sleep cycle at night consists of four cycles, each lasting 90 minutes. In each stage of the cycle, our body and brain rejuvenate in different ways. One area that is affected is our memory of that day. If you don’t go through the four cycles, then the hours of revision won’t be “consolidated” into your memory — moved from short term to long term memory. This causes stress and regularly losing sleep can contribute to poor mental well-being. Once I began to sleep enough, I really saw how it improved my life.

    These are just some of the changes I began to make which took my mental health out of the darkness I was in and back to the bright old me!

     

    Roya Mohamed was a former Cengage Student Ambassador studying psychology at Queen Mary University of London.

    Roya shared three meaningful student mental health tips that can help improve overall well-being. If you think these tips might be impactful for your students, share this article and also check out “5 Ways I’m Building Connections With My College Peers” by Pranav Harwadekar, a junior at Texas A&M University.

    Source link

  • Improve Student Feedback in 2025

    Improve Student Feedback in 2025

    Higher education is not only changing; it is racing ahead and as professors we must either catch up or fall behind! AI-powered grading is here, revolutionizing our assessment of students and offers insightful comments rather than some far-off fantasy. This is not only a need by 2025; it is also a must. Using AI-driven technologies, professors may at last escape tiresome grading and concentrate on what really counts—guiding students toward success. Let’s get into the details in this article!

     

    The Evolution of AI  

    Artificial intelligence (AI) is taking over rather than only invading education. You should be aware, AI is transforming classrooms all around from administrative automation to tailored learning paths. 

    The figures don’t lie: with a predicted 31.2% CAGR through 2030, the $5.88 billion worldwide AI in the education industry is rising. This fast expansion emphasizes one thing: higher education is heavily dependent on AI-powered solutions to improve feedback, simplify tests, and raise learning results.

     

    Key Benefits of AI-Powered Grading in 2025  

    Grading isn’t a never-ending cycle of late evenings and red pens! AI-powered grading is rewriting the rules and transforming a once time-consuming task into an instant, intelligent workflow. AI-driven systems automate grading across tests, essays, and even difficult responses in a quarter of the typical time, therefore eliminating the need for burying oneself in homework.

     

     

    And the resultant influence? Professors save up to 70% of grading time—time better used for real-world instruction, mentorship, and innovation rather than caught in an assessment cycle. AI is freeing professors to concentrate on what really counts—student success—not only saving time.

     

    How AI Enhances Student Learning & Engagement

    Grades are just numbers without context. Many times, traditional grading leaves students with unclear remarks or, worse, none at all. By giving rich, data-driven insights customized to every student, AI-powered grading transforms the game! 

    These clever technologies not only point out errors but also dissect replies, highlighting areas of strength and weakness with laser precision. The outcome of tailored, practical comments that enable students to advance more quickly than before. Customized feedback has been shown in studies to increase student performance by up to 40%; so, it is clear that intelligent grading results in intelligent learning.

    Trust us, this is about changing our assessment and enhancement of student learning, not only about efficiency. See the image below that sums up how AI elevates student learning and engagement! 

     

     

    Grading Powered by AI: Adoption Trends and Rates 

    Artificial intelligence is taking over at full speed; it is not invading higher education. According to a recent EDUCAUSE poll, 52% of institutions use AI to automate administrative tasks while 54% of them currently use it to influence curriculum design.

    Moreover, not only professors—43% of students actively use AI-powered products to improve their educational process.

    These figures clearly show that intelligent evaluation tools and AI-powered grading are not only becoming the new benchmark but also not new. AI is showing to be the future of tests as institutions hurry to improve efficiency, feedback, and learning results.

     

    AI Adoption in Higher Education

     

    Addressing Challenges and Ethical Considerations of AI Adoption

    Rising Artificial Intelligence-powered grading raises serious issues including algorithmic bias, data privacy, and a fear of losing human control. Is human touch ever replaceable by Artificial Intelligence grading? Should it? Institutions have to act early to guarantee ethical implementation: clear AI rules will help academics and students to know how AI evaluations operate.

    Frequent audits of Artificial Intelligence models help to reduce bias and guarantee equitable grading.

    • Combine artificial intelligence with human evaluation—automate the grunts but maintain human judgment in the loop.
    • Institutions can use AI’s efficiency without sacrificing academic integrity by aggressively addressing these concerns. 

     

    Creatrix Campus’s Role in AI-Powered Grading

    Grading should improve learning, not hinder it. Creatrix Campus transforms AI-powered grading into faster, smarter, and more informative evaluations. Our solution lets instructors focus on teaching and mentoring by automating tiresome chores and providing real-time, individualized feedback.

    Why Educators Trust Creatrix Campus: 

    • Accurate AI-driven grading
    • Real-time, tailored feedback
    • Smart analytics, identifying trends and learning gaps before they become issues
    • Integrates seamlessly with your LMS and other platforms.

    Smarter grading. Improved learning. Build the future of assessments together!

     

    Wrapping Up: AI-Powered Grading—The Future Right Now

    AI-powered grading is not only a development but also a revolution in how we evaluate, analyze, and improve student learning as we head farther toward 2025. AI is altering the professor’s job from cutting grading time to providing individualized feedback at scale, freeing more attention on teaching and mentoring than on administrative overburden.

    The next biggest question for higher ed leaders and assessment committees is not whether or not AI-powered grading should be embraced—rather, how quickly can we do it? Institutions may access smarter assessments, better learning outcomes, and a more agile academic ecosystem by adopting intelligent grading systems with a balanced approach—leveraging automation while keeping human oversight—by means of which they can maintain human control.

    Grade’s future is already here. All set to discover how artificial intelligence might change your university? Get in touch with Team Creatrix to see how we are enabling institutions to advance with AI-powered solutions! 

    .

    Source link

  • States have the tools to improve literacy — now they need to use them

    States have the tools to improve literacy — now they need to use them

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

    Bob Wise is a former governor of West Virginia and former member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Javaid Siddiqi is president and CEO of the Hunt Institute and a former Virginia secretary of education.

    Believe it or not, there is a clear path forward for literacy in the United States.

    A headshot of a person.

    Bob Wise

    Permission granted by The Hunt Institute

     

    We wouldn’t blame you to think otherwise given the grim outlook from the media, the federal government, and this year’s alarming results from The Nation’s Report Card. (In case you missed it — more than half of 4th and 8th graders are reading below proficiency. These are real children with futures at stake.)

    While the National Assessment of Educational Progress and other national measuring sticks sit on the chopping block with this presidential administration, the distressing trends emphasized by this year’s results spell disaster should we continue with current practices.

    But here’s a fresh perspective: Most states have already forged the tools to turn poor literacy performance into meaningful progress.

    In this polarized landscape, state policy and education leaders should take heart that education is a nonpartisan issue for much of the public. As a recent Hunt Institute survey showed, 89% of parents and voters across parties favor implementing evidence-based literacy programs in classrooms to improve student reading levels.

    According to 2024 data, 40 states and the District of Columbia have adopted major policy measures requiring these practices be incorporated at every stage of literacy education. The fact that so many red and blue states have recently adopted significant — and similar — legislative literacy initiatives shows widespread support.

    Passing laws is only part of the solution; effectively implementing them is now the major challenge.

    4th grade reading and math NAEP scores 2000-2024

    States are adopting major education literacy policy measures to improve student reading levels.

    That being said, education leaders must implement necessary pedagogy and maintain the necessary data to track improvement over the upcoming critical years.

    The most effective NAEP response from state education leaders would be to launch an intentional period of implementation of what is enacted into law. We’re seeing this in some states, but others, like Delaware and Iowa, have room for further action.

    A headshot of a person

    Javaid Siddiqi

    Permission granted by The Hunt Institute

     

    For state policymakers, the most meaningful implementation actions include:

    Signaling commitment through legislative oversight

    Legislators can drive improvement by exercising their traditional oversight role — holding hearings, reviewing implementation data, and identifying barriers. Education and finance committees should assess progress, address funding needs, and push for cross-agency collaboration. Few things prompt action from an agency like an invitation to testify at an oversight hearing.

    Ensuring statewide early literacy screening

    States should implement comprehensive early literacy screening strategies for pre-K through 3rd grade. Most states already require some form of screening to identify potential reading strengths and weaknesses. Tailoring instruction to each child’s individual needs and strengths is the critical first step in developing a personalized learning plan.

    Elevating teacher preparation

    Investing in the support, oversight, and improvement of teacher preparation programs is essential — how educators teach reading directly impacts student outcomes. Most states have mandated the removal of outdated curricula in favor of evidence-based practices rooted in the science of reading. 

    Through initiatives like The Hunt Institute’s Path Forward, states like Alabama are working to enhance teacher literacy training in partnership with educator preparation programs. While some institutions have made significant progress, many still need to align with best practices.

    Supporting district leadership

    Encourage and support school district leadership to adopt the necessary changes in policy and practice in every school and classroom. From tiny Buttonwillow in California to Birmingham Public Schools in Alabama, central office buy-in determines whether teaching practices evolve and reading performance improves.

    Significant change does not come on the cheap. States and districts must be prepared to provide funding for the necessary training for reading coaches, other forms of professional development, and relevant curriculum. Spend now to build strong readers, or pay more later in remediation.

    Source link

  • Tackling accent bias in Higher Education could improve students’ success, sense of belonging, and wellbeing

    Tackling accent bias in Higher Education could improve students’ success, sense of belonging, and wellbeing

    Accent Bias in Higher Education

    UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have a diverse population, encompassing students and staff from numerous linguistic backgrounds. Yet this linguistic diversity is often overlooked in university strategies, discourse, and practices, and students report experiencing accent-based stigmatisation. Worryingly, 30% of university students report having their accent mocked at university and 33% are concerned about their accent affecting their future success.

    Accent bias can have profound negative consequences throughout an individual’s life, affecting their school experience, job opportunities, work performance evaluations, and access to housing. These biases arise because accents trigger stereotypes about the social class, ethnicity, region, nationality, gender (and more) of the speakers. Such stereotypes can lead us to perceive certain speakers as more or less intelligent, competent, or fluent.

    In line with the Government’s mission to “Break Down Barriers to Opportunity”, addressing the negative consequences of accent bias in Higher Education (HE) is essential to ensure equal opportunities for young people to thrive at university and “follow the pathway that is right for them”.

    But what is the hidden impact of accent bias across UK HE? How does it influence students’ academic life, belonging and wellbeing?

    The Hidden Impact

    In our current research (Tomé Lourido & Snell, under review), we conducted an accent bias survey with over 600 students at a Russell Group University in the North of England. It showed that a significant number of students experience accent-based disadvantages that have a lasting negative impact on their academic life. Negative experiences were most frequently reported by students from the North of England, especially from working-class backgrounds, and students who did not grow up speaking English, especially from minoritised ethnic backgrounds. These include:

    • Being marked as different or inferior through negative evaluation, miscategorisation and frequent microaggressions, such as having their accent mimicked, mocked and commented on.
    • Facing barriers to academic engagement and success. Students from these groups report feeling that their contributions in academic settings are not valued because of their accent, which makes them reluctant to participate in class. Some feel pressured to change their accent, adding an additional cognitive burden to in-class participation. These students are disadvantaged because they miss opportunities to develop and refine their thinking through dialogue with others.
    • Impacts on wellbeing and career aspirations: Due to negative past experiences, some students internalise negative perceptions of their accent, affecting their confidence and wellbeing, and making them reluctant to take up new opportunities or follow certain career paths. This can have a knock-on effect on their mental health.   

    The accent-based disadvantages reported by students are not simply representative of wider societal prejudices; for many, the university context was unique in highlighting and amplifying these prejudices. Students also recognised that accent bias intersects with other forms of discrimination – class, race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality and disability – in complex ways.  Thus, we argue that HEIs should turn an analytic lens on themselves and take action to tackle accent bias and related inequities.

    From Awareness to Action: A Collaborative Approach

    There is work to be done for all of us in HEIs to embrace a true multilingual and multicultural ethos and challenge the idea that there is an idealised type of university student. We must “de-normalise” the microaggressions against students with accents perceived as “regional” or “foreign” and ensure that students from all backgrounds are able to participate in the classroom without feeling out of place. We propose four areas of interdisciplinary and collaborative work across the organisation:

    1. Raise awareness of accent bias and its negative consequences in collaboration with students and student unions. Create a communications campaign, provide targeted student and staff training, engage with career offices and employers.
    2. Tackle accent-based inequities by adopting a good practice statement about linguistic diversity and incorporating action into Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) policy and practice. Include content on linguistic diversity and discrimination in relevant university policies (e.g. mutual respect), strategies, student communications, and training (e.g. induction).
    3. Create a safe report and support route within existing systems for linguistic discrimination, bullying and harassment. Train staff supporting students, including personal tutors, on accent bias and its impact on academic life.
    4. Evaluate the effect of accent bias on students’ success, belonging and wellbeing. Track linguistic diversity. Assess the success of initiatives. 

    In addition to our own work, recent projects highlight the need for HEIs worldwide to address linguistic discrimination and its role in perpetuating existing inequalities. Initiatives led by Walt Wolfram (NC State University, US), John Hellerman and collaborators (Portland State University, US), and Christian Ilbury and Grace Mai Clark (University of Edinburgh, UK) have implemented cross-campus programs within their institutions. However, to effect sector-wide change, many more HEIs need to get involved.

    A Call for HEI Senior Leaders to Lead the Change

    Accent bias remains a largely unaddressed issue in large organisations. HEIs can play a pivotal role in leading a much-awaited societal change.

    Addressing accent bias in Higher Education is about breaking down barriers to opportunity and creating an environment in which all students, regardless of their background, can succeed in their studies, secure jobs, and contribute positively to society. By doing so, HEIs will support the employability of their students, a key metric for prospective students when selecting a university, and contribute to economic growth and social mobility.

    We encourage senior leaders to take proactive steps to tackle the negative consequences of accent bias and foster a more inclusive and equitable Higher Education system where students from all linguistic backgrounds can thrive.

    Source link

  • PSHE education can improve young people’s preparedness for higher education and beyond

    PSHE education can improve young people’s preparedness for higher education and beyond

    Personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education is the school curriculum subject in England dedicated to supporting children’s safety, health, wellbeing and preparation for life and work. When timetabled and taught effectively, it can play a key role in improving young people’s preparedness for life beyond school, including for higher education and the graduate labour market. For instance, PSHE education can provide a safe and dedicated space for young people to learn about sex and relationships, budgeting and time management, among other things that most students will need to navigate more independently – and sometimes for the first time – during higher education.

    As the official subject association for PSHE education, and a charity and membership body supporting over 50,000 teachers and schools nationally with resources, training and guidance, the PSHE Association was especially interested in the Higher Education Policy Institute’s (HEPI) recent report, One Step Beyond, which investigated how well the curriculum as a whole prepares young people for life beyond school.

    The report, which is based on an analysis of data from a survey of 1,105 undergraduates in England, found that over half of participants wanted to have received more education on personal finances and budgeting (59%) and to have had more opportunities to learn ‘life skills’ (51%) prior to entering higher education. A large minority also wanted to have received more careers education (44%), a topic that PSHE education covers and which, when delivered well, can make a positive difference to young people’s confidence, sense of direction and career trajectories.

    Importantly, the report also found that over half (58%) of participants wanted PSHE education to be compulsory until 18. At present, while relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) is compulsory for 16- to 18-year-olds in schools with sixth forms – and our own PSHE education planning guidance runs up to post-16 / key stage 5 – this requirement is not applicable to other settings, including sixth form and further education colleges. Furthermore, existing PSHE education content on economic wellbeing, personal financial education and careers education is optional in all but independent schools. As there is evidence to suggest that these are topics that young people from more affluent backgrounds are more likely to be taught about and discuss with their parents, all of PSHE education, including economic wellbeing, personal finance and careers education, has the potential to contribute towards narrowing social inequalities. And this is what we argue strongly for in our response to the Curriculum and Assessment Review, alongside strengthening the expectation that all young people should benefit from PSHE education up to the age of 18.

    The good news is that since statutory RSHE requirements were introduced in 2020, these appear to have made a positive impact. And the findings from the One Step Beyond report support this idea, with half of the participants reporting feeling well prepared for sex and relationships in higher education in 2024 (47%) – almost double the percentage that reported feeling this way three years earlier (27%).

    Another aspect of life which PSHE education can help young people to navigate during school, college and higher education is mental health. The One Step Beyond report found that most participants believed that their schools or colleges had done a ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ job of preparing them to plan and manage their workloads (61%); take care of their mental health and wellbeing (56%); and use healthy coping strategies (55%). However, a substantial minority of participants did not feel this way, suggesting that there is room to improve the quality of education that students receive on these topics – and PSHE education can play a crucial role in making this happen.

    PSHE education provides opportunities for young people to learn about mental health and develop skills that can support them in taking care of it. For example, through PSHE education, young people can be taught about how to prevent and manage stress, which can aggravate or contribute towards the development of mental health difficulties. This is achieved in a variety of ways. For instance, by providing opportunities for young people to be taught about how to problem solve, develop greater emotional awareness, use healthy coping strategies, maintain good sleep routines and recognise when and how to access support for themselves or others.

    After leaving school, such teaching could help young people to navigate further and higher education, which both demand greater independence and present unique opportunities and challenges. Illustrating this, when 136 A-level students were asked to describe their experience of sixth form using three words or phrases, the majority (79%) used at least one term to describe it as challenging and almost half (43%) described it as intense, stressful or overwhelming. Furthermore, across several interview studies, students have consistently described studying A-levels as a ‘massive step up’, a ‘jump’ and ‘a completely different ballgame’, which demands far more self-directed learning and can be an emotionally turbulent experience. It has also been found that experiencing education-related problems is among the main reasons why 16- to 18-year-olds contact Childline. So, PSHE education during school and post-16 education has the potential to support young people and contribute to improving higher education students’ mental health by equipping them with knowledge, understanding and skills that can help them to navigate this stage of education prior to entering it.

    To conclude, high-quality PSHE education has the potential to improve young people’s preparedness for many aspects of higher education – social, academic and economic – as well as for life beyond its walls. And it is for this reason that the PSHE Association has argued in response to the Curriculum Review and Assessment Group consultation that personal finance education and careers education should be placed on the same statutory footing as RSHE and for PSHE education, comprising all these elements, to be scheduled as a school curriculum subject in all schools, with at least one timetabled lesson per week.

    Findings from the One Step Beyond report indicate that PSHE education has had a positive impact on preparing young people for life beyond school, but that there is significant potential and need to build on improvements since elements of RSHE became statutory. This includes more emphasis on economic wellbeing, careers and mental health, as well as a guarantee that young people in all post-16 education settings can benefit from PSHE education until the age of 18 – not just those in specific settings.

    Source link

  • To Improve Peer Review, Give Reviewers More Choice (opinion)

    To Improve Peer Review, Give Reviewers More Choice (opinion)

    “Greetings! You’ve been added to our journal’s editorial system because we believe you would serve as an excellent reviewer of [Unexciting Title] manuscript …”

    You probably get these, too. It feels like such emails are propagating. The peer-review system may still be the best we have for academic quality assurance, but it is vulnerable to human overload, preferences and even mood. A result can be low-effort, late or unconstructive reviews, but first the editors must be lucky enough to find someone willing to do a review at all. There should be a better way. Here’s an idea of how to rethink the reviewer allocation process.

    The Pressure on Peer Review

    As the number of academic papers continues to grow, so do refereeing tasks. Scientists struggle to keep up with increasing demands to publish their own work while also accepting the thankless task of reviewing others’ work. In the wake, low-effort, AI-generated and even plagiarized reviewer reports find fertile ground, feeding a vicious circle that slowly undermines the process. Peer review—the bedrock of scientific quality control—is under pressure.

    Editors have been experimenting with ways to rethink the peer-reviewing process. Ideas include paying reviewers, distributing review tasks among multiple reviewers (on project proposals), transparently posting reviews (already an option for some Nature journals) or tracking and giving virtual credits for reviews (as with Publon). However, in one aspect, journals have apparently not experimented a lot: how to assign submitted papers to qualified reviewers.

    The standard approach for reviewer selection is to match signed-up referees with submitted papers using a keyword search, the paper’s reference list or the editors’ knowledge of the field and community. Reviewers are invited to review only one paper at a time—but often en masse to secure enough reviews—and if they decline, someone else may be invited. It’s an unproductive process.

    Choice in Work Task Allocation Can Improve Performance

    Inspired by our ongoing research on giving workers more choice in work task allocation in a manufacturing setting, it struck me that academic referees have limited choices when asked to review a paper for a journal. It’s basically a “yes, I’ll take it” or “no, I won’t.” They are only given the choice of accepting or rejecting one paper from a journal at a time. That seems to be the modus operandi across all disciplines I have encountered.

    In our study in a factory context, productivity increased when workers could choose among several job tasks. The manufacturer we worked with had implemented a smartwatch-based work task allocation system: Workers wore smartwatches showing open work tasks that they could accept or reject. In a field experiment, we provided some workers the opportunity to select from a menu of open tasks instead of only one. Our results showed that giving choice improved work performance.

    A New Approach: Reviewers’ Choice

    Similar to the manufacturing setting, academic reviewers might also do better in a system that empowers them with options. One way to improve peer review may be as simple as presenting potential referees with a few submitted papers’ titles and abstracts to choose from for review.

    The benefits of choice in reviewer allocation are realistic: Referees may be more likely to accept a review when asked to select one among several, and their resulting review reports should be more timely and developmental when they are genuinely curious about the topic. For example, reviewers could choose one among a limited set of titles and abstracts that fit their area of domain or methodological expertise.

    Taking it further, publishers could consider pooling submissions from several journals in a cross-journal submission and peer-review platform. This could help make the review process focus on the research, not where it’s submitted—aligned with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. I note that double-blind reviews rather than single-blind may be preferable in such a platform to reduce biases based on affiliations and names.

    What Can Go Wrong

    In light of the increased pressure on the publishing process, rethinking the peer-review process is important in its own right. However, shifting to an alternative system based on choice introduces a few new challenges. First, there is the risk of authors exposing ideas to a broader set of reviewers, who may be more interested in getting ideas for their next project than engaging in a constructive reviewing process.

    Relatedly, if the platform is cross-journal, authors may be hesitant to expose their work to many reviewers in case of rejections. Second, authors may be tempted to use clickbait titles and abstracts—although this may backfire on the authors when reviewers don’t find what they expected in the papers. Third, marginalized or new topics may find no interested reviewers. As in the classic review process, such papers can still be handled by editors in parallel. While there are obstacles that should be considered, testing a solution should be low in risk.

    Call to Action

    Publishers already have multi-journal submission platforms, making it easier for authors to submit papers to a range of journals or transfer manuscripts between them. Granting more choices to reviewers as well should be technically easy to implement. The simplest way would be to use the current platforms to assign reviewers a low number of papers and ask them to choose one. A downside could be extended turnaround times, so pooling papers across a subset of journals could be beneficial.

    For success, the reviewers should be vetted and accept a code of conduct. The journal editors must accept that their journals will be reviewed at the same level and with the same scrutiny as other journals in the pool. Perhaps there could be tit-for-tat guidelines, like completing two constructive reviews or more for each paper an author team submits for review. Such rules could work when there is an economy of scale in journals, reviewers and papers. Editors, who will try it first?

    Torbjørn Netland is a professor and chair of production and operations management in the Department of Management, Technology, and Economics at ETH Zurich.

    Source link

  • How colleges can improve financial transparency in fee payments

    How colleges can improve financial transparency in fee payments

    Effective higher education fee management maximizes revenue, reduces losses, and builds confidence with students and parents. However, 65% of institutions lose money owing to obsolete, manual processes (EDUFinance 2024). This is where student fees collection software shines.

    Let’s look at 10 data-driven strategies to improve student fee collection software for transparency and efficiency.

     

    Why Modern Student Fees Collection Software Matters

    Did you know 37% of college finance teams track fees using spreadsheets, which can lead to errors and miscalculations (Campus Finance Survey, 2024)? Student finance cloud technologies automate complex operations, reduce manual errors, and offer a transparent, real-time financial environment.

     

     

    How colleges can improve financial transparency in fee payments? 10 proven ways. 

     

    1. One seamless student registration and data sync

    Create comprehensive student profiles automatically matched with student information systems (SIS) including demographic data, course information, and financial details. Institutions running linked data systems report 23% faster fee processing.

     

    2. Clearly structured fees

    Fee breakdowns cause 48% of parents to argue (EdTech Insights, 2023). Flexible fees per department, course, or service offer upfront transparency and easier payments.

     

    3. Channel-wide fee collection automation

    Students prefer mobile payments 72% (Higher Ed Payment Trends, 2024). Make websites, mobile apps, and self-service portals accept rapid payments. Automated schools collected fees 27% faster and missed 15% fewer.

     

    4. Fine automation, absenteeism tracking

    Establish absenteeism and late payment penalties. Automation has reduced fee defaulters by 19% and ensures regular sanctions without manual follow-up.

     

    5. Role-based security to protect finances

    Role-based access control is non-negotiable even if 63% of higher education institutions report financial intrusions (EduCyberReport, 2024). Minimizing fraud and mistakes, only authorised staff should handle fee data.

     

    6. Parent portals for real-time fee visibility

    Parents demand more financial participation in their children’s education (82%, ParentPulse Survey, 2024). Parents receive transparent information regarding dues, invoices, and payment schedules via a portal, decreasing late payments.

     

    7. Automatic fee calculations for billing free of errors

    Errors in manual fee computation affect institutions’ annual income up to 4%. Calculate fees automatically using pre-defined criteria to guarantee correct, current billing for every student.

     

    8. Waivers, fee concessions, and flexible payment options

    Offer waivers, discounts, and flexible payment arrangements without any confusion on the back end. Supporting financially challenged students with structured payment plans resulted in 12% higher retention rates for colleges that have implemented this approach.

     

    9. Automatic fee reminders for on-time payments

    According to EduFinance Insights (2024), overlooked reminders account for 43% of late payments. Send automated fee reminders via email, SMS, and push notifications to significantly reduce the number of late payments.

     

    10. Real time financial transparency reports

    Access transaction history, income breakdowns, and outstanding amounts instantly. Real-time reporting improved financial forecasting and reconciliation for 89% of finance directors.

     

    The Bottom Line: Future-Proof Your Fee Management with Creatrix Campus

    Why let outdated processes drain your institution’s revenue? With Creatrix Campus Fee Management Software, higher education institutions can achieve:

    • Faster fee collection with automation and mobile payments
    • Enhanced financial transparency for students, parents, and administrators
    • Stronger security with role-based access and encrypted data
    • Real-time insights for smarter, data-driven financial decisions

    Ready to transform your fee collection process? Let Creatrix Campus help you boost efficiency, ensure transparency, and future-proof your institution’s financial operations.

    Source link

  • Mid-Semester Course Corrections: Using the MSF Model to Engage Students and Improve Courses – Faculty Focus

    Mid-Semester Course Corrections: Using the MSF Model to Engage Students and Improve Courses – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Mid-Semester Course Corrections: Using the MSF Model to Engage Students and Improve Courses – Faculty Focus

    Mid-Semester Course Corrections: Using the MSF Model to Engage Students and Improve Courses – Faculty Focus

    Source link