Tag: isnt

  • Mobility Isn’t a Choice: How Higher Education Can Better Serve Military Learners

    Mobility Isn’t a Choice: How Higher Education Can Better Serve Military Learners

    This post is excerpted from a forthcoming book on learner mobility to be published in July 2025 by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers.


    Every few years, they pack up their lives, move across states—or oceans—and start over. New schools, new systems, new expectations.

    For military learners, this isn’t a study abroad adventure or a career move; it’s a way of life. Yet while their reality is defined by mobility, too many of our systems in higher education still assume stability.

    Military learners make up about five percent of the undergraduate population—roughly 820,000 students nationwide. But they aren’t a monolith. They’re active-duty service members juggling college coursework with operational demands like exercises, surprise inspections, and even deployments. They’re veterans navigating civilian life, often in isolation, and often while supporting a family. They’re National Guard and reserve members wearing multiple hats that opposing forces demand they change on command. And they’re spouses and dependents navigating new colleges, mid-degree or mid-semester, again and again, with each relocation.

    Their stories are different, but the friction points are the same: staying on track academically while managing a life defined by mobility.

    Unlike traditional students, military learners don’t choose when or where they go—on orders, deployments, or other permanent or temporary service-related relocations. And each move can derail progress. Credits don’t transfer, residency rules reset, tuition costs spike, and financial aid doesn’t always follow the same logic. These students bring resilience, discipline, and lived experience into our classrooms, but higher education hasn’t fully adjusted to meet them where they are.

    The transfer tangle and financial aid maze

    One of the biggest hurdles is transfer credit. While articulation agreements—formal arrangements for transferring credits between institutions—do exist, they often don’t reflect the realities of military learners, especially when it comes to military training or nontraditional learning experiences. Some accumulate credits from multiple institutions, only to be told their new school won’t accept them.

    The result? Lost time, lost money, and unnecessary frustration.

    Add to that the patchwork of residency rules. Even when learners are stationed in a state under military orders, they may not qualify for in-state tuition. While states like Virginia and Florida have implemented inclusive policies, others continue to lag, turning mobility into a penalty as well as a reality.

    Financial aid adds another layer of complexity. Programs like tuition assistance and the GI Bill are essential, but they often fall short. Tuition assistance differs by branch and may not cover full tuition at private or out-of-state schools. The Post-9/11 GI Bill is a powerful benefit, but its eligibility rules and transfer limitations don’t always align with the unpredictable, stop-and-go nature of military life.

    What states and institutions are doing right

    There are promising models to build on. In Ohio, Military Transfer Assurance Guides standardize how public institutions accept military training as credit. Texas and New York offer additional tuition support for veterans, while Florida helps cover housing and textbook costs when GI Bill payments lapse between terms.

    At the institutional level, schools like Grand Valley State University, Syracuse University, and the City University of New York (CUNY) are raising the bar. Their “Veteran Promise” programs guarantee admission, recognize military training, and offer wraparound support tailored to military-connected students.

    That’s not charity—that’s what equity looks like. When institutions commit, military learners succeed.

    The power and promise of credit for prior learning

    Credit for prior learning (CPL) may be one of the most powerful—and underused—tools to support military learners, who bring extensive work and life experience to their postsecondary studies that can be translated into credit.

    CPL recognizes that learning happens outside the classroom: through military training, job experience, CLEP exams, or portfolio assessments. When applied effectively, it can shorten the path to graduation, reduce student debt, and boost confidence for learners who’ve already mastered real-world skills.

    Tools like ACE’s Military Guide help institutions apply CPL consistently and responsibly. But here’s the problem: CPL isn’t consistently communicated, awarded, or valued. In some cases, it’s limited to elective credits rather than core degree requirements, undermining its purpose.

    CPL isn’t just about transfer and awarding credit; it’s also about unlocking opportunity. Validated learning can, and should, play a role in admissions, satisfying prerequisites, waiving introductory or duplicative coursework, and advising military learners on the path that is best for them. When institutions fully embrace the broader utility of CPL, they open more doors for military learners to engage meaningfully with higher education from the very start of their journeys.

    To change that, institutions need more than buy-in—they need system-wide strategies. CPL should be central to transfer reform conversations, especially when supporting learners who are older, more experienced, and balancing school with work or caregiving.

    The role of advising and ecosystem support

    Too often, military learners don’t get the tailored advice they need. On-base education centers can be vital entry points, but they need stronger bridges to campus advising teams who understand military culture, CPL, and transfer systems. Institutions sometimes resist broader CPL use over concerns about revenue loss or academic rigor, while students are left unaware of opportunities due to poor communication or advising gaps. Aligning on-base education centers with well-trained campus advisors is one step forward; improving internal communication across departments is another.

    Student Veterans of America’s Success Hub, which includes the SVA Advising Center, supports all service members, veterans, and their families in making informed decisions about higher education opportunities and meaningful careers through the use of AI, success coaches, and expertise where the military, veterans, and higher education intersect.

    Organizations like NACADA are doing the work to improve professional development in this area, but we need deeper, sustained collaboration. Cross-sector partnerships between colleges, employers, and the U.S. Department of Defense are where real impact happens.

    Programs like Syracuse’s Onward to Opportunity and ACE’s Reimagining Transfer for Student Success illustrate what’s possible when higher education and workforce systems align.

    The BLUF, or Bottom Line Up Front

    Military learners aren’t asking for special treatment. They ask for systems to make sense for the lives they actually lead. With the right policy changes, institutional commitments, and collaborative frameworks, we can turn mobility from a barrier into a bridge.

    But we also need better data, better pathways, and a better understanding of what success looks like for these students—not just access, but degree completion and career readiness. Military learners aren’t an exception. They are the future of an inclusive, prepared, and resilient workforce.

    It’s time higher education met these students where they are because they’re already leading the way.


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • This isn’t just about Harvard

    This isn’t just about Harvard

    Maybe you’re sick of hearing news about Harvard. We can’t blame you.

    But as free speech defenders, we go where the censorship is. The government picks the targets, not us. And — once again — the government is unconstitutionally targeting Harvard.

    You don’t have to like Harvard to oppose the government’s recent demands of the university.

    FIRE has plenty of problems with that “small school outside of Boston.” It has been at the bottom of our College Free Speech Rankings for the last two years. We’ve defended students and faculty rights at the university since our founding in 1999, and we know better than anyone that there’s plenty of work to do.

    But you can’t fight censorship with censorship.

    Yesterday, the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard’s ability to enroll international students.

    In doing so, DHS conditioned future international enrollment on Harvard turning over a slew of information within 72 hours, including “all audio or video footage…of any protest activity involving a nonimmigrant student on a Harvard University campus in the last five years.” [emphasis added]

    That’s shocking.

    The feds are demanding more than just information involving illegal activity or violations of the student code of conduct. They want footage of “protest activity” — including speech protected by the First Amendment.

    And unless those protests involve only international students, American citizens will also find their constitutionally protected speech in the hands of America’s national security apparatus.

    Fortunately, a federal judge quickly issued a temporary restraining order, preventing the government’s action from taking effect — for now. But as Harvard alleges in its lawsuit, the federal government’s shakedown isn’t limited to these demands. DHS’s decision is part of a broader bullying campaign by the administration to undermine the First Amendment and due process in the name of enforcing federal civil rights law.

    Make no mistake: The federal government has a duty to enforce civil rights law. But it must do so in a manner consistent with the First Amendment and guarantees of due process.

    The feds can’t force Harvard to eviscerate academic freedom in order to maintain federal funding. They can’t revoke the university’s tax-exempt status because they don’t like what it teaches. And they can’t enlist the university in a surveillance program of constitutionally protected speech.

    FIRE has long opposed the weaponization of civil rights law to undermine free speech and due process protections. Indeed we spent more than a decade opposing — successfully — the Obama and Biden administrations’ efforts to do just that. And because we stand for principle, not partisanship, we’ll fight the good fight no matter who’s in the White House.

    Attacks on our rights often begin with unpopular targets. We know Harvard isn’t popular in many quarters, and we know many strongly believe it violated civil rights law. But the government has to follow the law. Free speech rights aren’t contingent on a popularity contest. Nothing justifies the government taking shortcuts that themselves violate the law — and the Constitution.

    Our rights are not divisible. We must protect free speech and due process for all — or we don’t protect them at all.

    Source link

  • For those in HE cold spots, higher education isn’t presenting as a good bet

    For those in HE cold spots, higher education isn’t presenting as a good bet

    Bridget Phillipson has said she wants to work with universities to widen access, and participation for those from lower income backgrounds is one of the government’s five priorities for higher education.

    But the words of a 17-year-old trainee legal assistant in Doncaster reveals how much of a challenge it will be to overcome the scepticism towards the value of a university education in a “cold spot”’ town;

    I love jobs and I can’t wait to get another job, because I just love getting paid. I want to go to uni, to live on my own and to get drunk all the time – the uni party lifestyle, right? But if I do it just for that, then I’m getting into debt. If I just go straight into work, then I don’t have anything to pay back.

    This quote underlines the findings from the opening paper of the UPP Foundation’s inquiry into widening participation, which showed how alongside gender- and class-based inequalities in rates of progression to HE, there are huge gulfs in the rate at which young people progress to university at 18 across different areas of the country. Almost 70 per cent of Wimbledon 18-year-olds go to university, compared to just 25.9 per cent of those in Houghton and Sunderland South – Bridget Phillipson’s own constituency.

    With some local authorities lacking a university and also exhibiting rates of progression to HE lower than one might expect based on young people’s academic attainment, our new paper, published today, sets out how and why these “cold spots” for progression to HE struggle to inspire young people to go to university.

    Daunted by costs

    During our research trip to Doncaster – one of England’s worst-performing local authorities for progression to university at eighteen, and a case study for cold spots as a result – the scepticism towards university that our trainee legal assistant exhibited came up time and time again. None of the eight parents in our focus group selected university as their preferred post-18 option for their children, and only one of the 16-18 year olds we spoke to in our focus group intended to apply to university. The primary objection was cost.

    Parents, young people, and adults of all ages that we spoke to in our immersive work thought that university was simply too great an expense for most people in the area to justify. Among those who had been to university, or knew those who had, it seemed that everyone had a horror story to tell about a friend or relative who had been burned by astronomical living expenses, or resented being mired in debt after doing a degree that had only passing relevance to their eventual career.

    Even when the long-run opportunities that university provides seem enticing, the mounting cost of maintaining an undergraduate degree is a daunting prospect to many. Few thought that universities, colleges or schools had done a good job of making pathways through higher education seem clear, achievable and valuable.

    Crowd in communities

    The challenge for places like Doncaster is that the opportunities that university provides are anything but obvious. Residents were at pains to stress that Doncaster is a place that feels like the economy has left it behind, with jobs few and far between and graduate careers a luxury seemingly reserved for other places.

    As one woman we spoke to put it: “The jobs in Doncaster, a lot of them you don’t require a degree for – we’re an industrial type of town.” Across our conversations in the area, it became clear that since the job market could not provide the security, stability and prospects that people wanted, family and community took on that role instead.

    In this context, then, going to university is a double-edged sword: the aspirational youngsters we spoke to were excited by the opportunities that university could provide, but they recognised that this probably meant getting out of Doncaster and staying out. To many people we spoke to, leaving home, and one’s hometown, was a hidden psychological cost heaped on top of the very real financial burden of university.

    With all this in mind, the ambivalence of cold spot residents towards university seems not reckless, but rational. If we think of university as a “bet” that people make on the understanding that the “payoff” is a higher graduate salary in the long run, then it is easy to see why those in areas with no university and few graduate jobs would be reluctant to make that sort of commitment.

    If the government wants to make good on its commitment to widen university participation, it will require a multifaceted approach that crowds in whole communities, not just bright teenagers with good prospects. They will need to work with schools, colleges, universities and local employers to make the value of university clear across generations. Cold spots can make university feel like a reckless gamble – it’s up to the government to make it a good bet.

    This article is published in association with the UPP Foundation.

    Source link

  • Eliminating grade inflation isn’t as easy as ABC

    Eliminating grade inflation isn’t as easy as ABC

    A perfect grade point average isn’t what it used to be. As grade inflation continues worldwide, more students are earning top marks, but it isn’t always deserved. Critics argue that inflated grades make it harder to distinguish truly exceptional students, while supporters say they reduce stress and improve confidence. 

    From high schools in the United States to universities in Europe, the debate over grade inflation is shaping education systems and college admissions. But is this trend helping students succeed, or is it setting them up for failure?

    Grade inflation is the trend of rising student grades over time without a corresponding increase in academic achievement, often making higher grades less reflective of actual learning or ability. 

    High school is meant to prepare students for higher education, but with grade inflation, many students feel unprepared. 

    Take high school senior Ruby Schwelm. “As a student who has dealt with inflation, I’ve noticed I don’t receive grades and feedback that reflect my actual understanding of the content,” Schwelm said. “I feel like I’m just going through the motions of my courses, completing assignments without really engaging with the material. This makes it hard to track progress, see where I need improvement and feel prepared for college.”

    The rising GPA

    According to a study by ACT, a non-profit organization that runs one of two standardized tests used in the United States used for college admissions, the average adjusted grade point average (GPA) of students in the United States has risen from 3.17 in 2010 to 3.36 in 2021. 

    The report said that grade inflation “calls into question the degree to which we should rely on grades to measure academic achievement or predict future grades.” This shift challenges the typical role of grades as a reliable measure of knowledge, starting a debate over whether they still hold value in measuring students’ abilities.  

    Many educators believe that the shift in grading has led to a lack of rigor and academic accountability. Josh Hsu, a high school English teacher at the Tatnall School in Wilmington, Delaware where I go to high school, said that many students now equate a C with failure, despite it being historically recognized as an average grade.

    “There seems to be a threshold of how low grades will go, and that bar gets pushed higher and higher,” Hsu said.

    This trend has caused concern among educators who feel that the traditional grading system no longer differentiates students based on their academic performance. 

    “What does an A mean if everybody has an A, right?” Hsu said. 

    The psychological effects of grade inflation

    Proponents of grade inflation argue that it helps students maintain self-confidence and reduces academic stress. 

    Sara Gartland, a high school math teacher at the Tatnall School and adjunct professor at the University of Delaware School of Education, said that “there’s a lot of tension in what a grade is.” 

    She worries that students today see grades as a measure of their worth rather than as a tool for learning. Grades should function as a feedback loop between teachers and students rather than a rigid measure of success, Gartland said. 

    She also emphasized the importance of second chances. “I tend to see that really what students are looking for is, ‘Do I have a second chance if today is not my best day?’,” she said. 

    This perspective aligns with educational philosophies that prioritize mastery over memorization. Many teachers now allow students the opportunity to make corrections and retake assessments to make sure that students truly understand the material, which can also lift the burden of test stress off of students. 

    Elevated grades and equity

    While grade inflation is happening across the country, there have been concerns over whether grade inflation is proportionally impacting students of different incomes and communities. 

    Hsu said that parents of students in private schools often expect their children to earn high grades to get into a top college in return for the price of tuition. While this belief may lead people to assume that wealthier students have proportionately higher grades than lower-income students, this actually is not the case. 

    The ACT’s study shows that the average GPA of students in a household with an income of under $36,000 a year has grown much faster than the GPA of students in a household with an income of $100,000 from 2012 to 2021. This could be due to teachers inadvertently trying to give a break to students from low-income families to try and level the playing field. 

    Gartland argues that teachers should provide students with the tools they need for success and take into consideration things that may impact a student’s performance outside of the classroom. 

    “That [grade on a test] doesn’t necessarily take into consideration your drive to school that day, whether or not you forgot your lunch that day, or let’s say you had a particularly exciting life event or a particularly upsetting life event, and you didn’t get to spend the amount of time studying that other students did, all sorts of other things,” she said. 

    With this mindset in education, students are being treated with equity, allowing them the opportunity to experience the same academic success, even if there are barriers in their way. 

    Global patterns in how students are graded

    While the issue of grade inflation is often discussed in the context of schools in the United States, grade inflation is a global issue. A 2024 study, by researchers at the College of New Jersey, found that many countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany and Canada have all experienced rising average grades over time. 

    However, the extent of grade inflation varies from country to country. Australia, for example, maintains relatively strict grading standards through the use of relative grading and limited reliance on student achievement.

    This study also showed that there are many differences in grading practices from region to region. In the United States, professors were significantly more likely to use curved grading, a practice strongly associated with grade inflation. 

    In contrast, educators in Europe and the South Pacific gave lower average grades and curved fewer grades, suggesting a more conservative approach to grading. Asian countries showed grading patterns similar to the United States, with higher usage of grade curves and slightly elevated grade averages.

    These disparities have real implications. Grade inflation complicates international admissions, making it harder to fairly compare students from different educational systems. 

    It can also distort hiring practices. The international study on grade inflation found that in Sweden, students from schools with inflated grades were shown to earn up to 5% more than peers with equivalent abilities. Ultimately, when grades become inflated, they lose their value as an objective measure of performance, creating global challenges in education, employment, and equity. 

    A shift in college admissions 

    As I went through the process of applying to college, I learned from my college counselors how grade inflation has affected the college admissions process. As grade inflation rises, colleges and employers are shifting their focus away from GPAs and toward other indications of student potential. Admissions officers are increasingly looking at extracurricular activities, personal essays and recommendation letters to evaluate applicants.

    According to a report by the group FairTest, which works for equity in educational assessments, standardized tests, which once served as a counterbalance to inflated grades, are also becoming optional at many colleges and universities, further complicating the process of evaluating students.

    Hsu said he worries that without clear academic standards, the education system could lose its credibility. “If you don’t have a set of standards, then it just becomes the Wild West, and then you have everyone getting A’s and B’s and you have students with GPAs that they didn’t earn,” he said.

    Employers, too, are placing greater emphasis on internships and real-world experience rather than assuming high grades equate to a strong work ethic and mastery of material. 

    With the recent trends of grade inflation, we can expect the average GPAs of students across the country to continue to rise. Hsu worries some students have become lazier in recent years. This raises concerns about how this will impact the future of education and if students will be prepared for life post-graduation.

    “Everyone wants instant gratification now,” Hsu said. “They don’t want to work at things as hard because if they have challenges, they’re not willing to stumble through those challenges or fight through them.”


    Questions to consider:

    • What is meant by grade inflation?

    • How can student achievement be measured without letter or number grades?

    • Do you think that getting an A on an assignment should be difficult? Why?


     

    Source link

  • “Portrayed as a place that isn’t what I know it to be”: Professor Bell on ANU’s public perception

    “Portrayed as a place that isn’t what I know it to be”: Professor Bell on ANU’s public perception

    ANU vice-chancellor Genevieve Bell with Rachel Marape at James Marape, the Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea’s address to the ANU in February, 2024. Picture: Martin Ollman

    Australian National University’s (ANU) vice-chancellor Genevieve Bell has made a statement confirming she plans to stand by her university after a “four-month negative media campaign.”

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link