Tag: Jobs

  • Berkeley Suspends Lecturer for Pro-Palestinian Comments

    Berkeley Suspends Lecturer for Pro-Palestinian Comments

    lucentius/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    The University of California, Berkeley, suspended lecturer Peyrin Kao without pay for the spring semester because he made pro-Palestinian political comments during class. 

    Kao, a lecturer in the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, participated in a 38-day hunger strike this fall to protest the use of technology in what he called Israel’s genocide in Gaza. He allegedly told students during class that he was undergoing a “starvation diet” and directed them to his website to learn more about why he was striking. 

    Also, last spring, Kao allegedly made “off-topic” remarks including about “the conflict in Israel and Gaza, an expression of solidarity with a protest happening outside the classroom, Google’s business dealings with Israel, UC’s investment in companies that themselves invest in companies that ‘supply bombs,’ and calls for solidarity with those in Gaza and to ‘Free Palestine,’” executive vice chancellor and provost Benjamin Hermalin wrote in his letter recommending that Kao be suspended. 

    Hermalin ultimately determined that Kao violated a Board of Regents policy requiring that instructors only discuss content relevant to the course in session during class time. With his comments and actions, Kao “misused the classroom for the purpose of political advocacy,” Hermalin wrote. Kao will be suspended for six months, starting Jan. 1. 

    “Mr. Kao drew attention to his hunger strike in class and informed the students how they could find out why he was engaging in it. In addition, the visible physical toll it presumably was taking and the adverse consequences it may have had on the quality of his instruction all represent a form of advocacy, albeit nonverbal,” Hermalin wrote. “In that sense, his actions are no different from those of an instructor who repeatedly wore a t-shirt when teaching that had on it a very visible political symbol or a picture of a political candidate.”

    Kao denied any wrongdoing and plans to appeal the decision. 

    “The timing of my punishment raises serious questions about whether it was a politically motivated decision by the university to appease the Trump administration. My suspension is the latest in a long line of faculty and students disciplined for taking a stance against occupation and genocide in Palestine,” Kao said in a statement distributed by the San Francisco Bay Area Council on American-Islamic Relations, which also denounced Kao’s suspension. “The university is trying to make an example out of me and suppress any conversation about Palestine, because those conversations would expose the university’s investment in genocide. I will not be deterred by this unconstitutional attack on free speech, and I intend to continue exercising my First Amendment right to advocate for a free Palestine.” 

    Berkeley officials declined to answer Inside Higher Ed’s questions about Kao’s suspension.

    “The university does not comment on confidential personnel matters,” a spokesperson wrote in an email. “Speaking generally regarding free speech policy, the university will always take a viewpoint-neutral approach when it comes to supporting freedom of expression and actions that align with policy.”

    Source link

  • Over 1 Million Digital Badges on Offer in the U.S.

    Over 1 Million Digital Badges on Offer in the U.S.

    The number of unique credentials available in the U.S. has hit a whopping 1.8 million, with digital badges making up more than a million of those offerings, according to the latest report from Credential Engine.

    The report, released Tuesday, is the fifth in a series tracking the ever-growing variety of credentials and providers cropping up across the country. Much has changed since the last “Counting Credentials” report came out in 2022. Credential Engine, a nonprofit dedicated to charting the credentialing landscape, improved its data collection and analysis strategies to remove duplicate programs from data samples and include more badge programs, allowing for more accurate counts and estimates, the new report noted.

    Researchers found that 134,491 credential providers—including colleges and universities, online course providers, nonacademic organizations, industry associations, and state governments—are producing 1,850,034 credentials, up from the 1,076,358 they counted in 2022. The report also found that education institutions, federal and state governments, and employers spend $2.34 trillion annually on these programs.

    Credential Engine identified 1,022,028 badges and 486,352 certificates among the total. Degrees, by comparison, made up a smaller fraction of the credentials tallied this year: 264,099 programs. The number of secondary school diplomas and occupational licenses followed behind at 52,948 and 14,331, respectively. Certifications, which require an exam and tend to expire, reached 6,892. And the organization found 3,384 microcredentials, defined by the report as any program offered by a massive open online course provider that embraces the label.

    Scott Cheney, CEO of Credential Engine, said the standout finding to him is “there’s a lot of digital badging being done,” a trend he finds “really exciting.” He believes digital badges, which recognize specific skills and achievements for display online, allow workers to better showcase their learning at a more granular level. For example, badges, whether offered by academic or nonacademic providers, can recognize skill sets ranging from emotional intelligence to mastery of a coding language, or even completion of a class or work project.

    Badges are “being used to recognize smaller and smaller learning activity and skill attainment,” Cheney said. “We’re really seeing a moment when we’re able to actually count all learning,” which helps job applicants “tell their story.”

    He said the digital format not only makes it easier for learners to keep track of everything they’ve achieved but also simplifies sharing that information with employers.

    A companion report, released with the credential count, suggests innovations like digital wallets and learning and employment records, which can house collections of digital credentials, are making badges more shareable and verifiable for employers.

    “The technology is there,” Cheney said.

    He also believes the ascent of skills-based hiring is driving the trend. More than half of states have adopted policies to encourage hiring according to skills, not degrees, and a slew of employers have embraced the approach. He’d like to see more employers with these goals use digital credentials to assess what candidates bring to the table.

    Because of these recent developments, “all of a sudden, we need ways to actually unpack the skills that you have in a traditional degree or certificate or certification” and to offer ways to learn and prove mastery of “a single skill,” he said.

    Though the report doesn’t delve into it, he noted that traditional higher education institutions are increasingly interested in offering nondegree credentials, which he believes is “healthy for them and their relationship with their students” as demand for such programs ramps up.

    But Cheney also understands colleges’ trepidation about entering a nondegree credential landscape that’s crowded, “very chaotic” and “difficult to navigate.” He acknowledged that some academics have healthy concerns about the quality of proliferating nondegree credentials as nonacademic credential providers grow their offerings at fast clip. The trend “does cry out for … a greater need to have reliable outcome data and impact data,” he said. Members of the committee engaged in the negotiated rule-making process for Workforce Pell, a new federal financial aid option for short-term job training programs, are wrestling with such questions about how to ensure credentials’ quality this week.

    Nondegree credentials aren’t “going to be right for every institution, and that’s OK, too,” Cheney said. “We need some that are still going to be very traditional … because the economy needs that as well.” At the same time, higher ed institutions “need to recognize where the marketplace is, where the zeitgeist is in the country and what employers need and what students are calling out for.”

    Source link

  • Clemson President Announces Sudden Retirement

    Clemson President Announces Sudden Retirement

    sbrogan/E+/Getty Images

    Clemson University president Jim Clements is retiring at the end of the month, bringing an abrupt end to his 12-year tenure at the helm of the public institution in South Carolina.

    He cited “health and family” as his reasons for stepping down just over a year after he signed a five-year contract extension.

    “Clemson has been my home and passion, yet my greatest love is for my wife, Beth, and our children and grandchildren. Life moves quickly, and I don’t want to miss what truly matters—the major milestones and the quiet, everyday joys,” Clements wrote in a Tuesday message announcing his retirement. “Those are the moments I want to experience and hold close.”

    Clements joined Clemson in 2013 after nearly five years as president of West Virginia University.

    He cited a record number of applications and Clemson’s attainment of Research-1 status under the Carnegie classification system, achieved in 2013, among his accomplishments. Board of Trustees chair Kim Wilkerson also said in her own message that under Clements’s leadership, “Clemson achieved record enrollment and graduation rates, expanded research initiatives and secured historic philanthropic support.”

    More recently, however, Clements courted controversy after the university fired three employees for allegedly making inappropriate remarks about the death of Charlie Kirk. The university appeared to claim in a social media post related to the firings that First Amendment rights do not “extend to speech that incites harm or undermines the dignity of others.”

    Clemson also shut down faculty and staff affinity groups intended to advise leaders on how to support Black, Latino, LGBTQ+ students, veterans and others in September. At the time, Clemson officials claimed, “The commissions have successfully fulfilled their important charge.”

    Now Clemson is expected to name an interim president at an emergency board meeting Wednesday. Provost Bob Jones, who was planning to retire, is expected to be named to the interim role and to “serve until a successor is named,” according to Wilkerson’s statement.

    Source link

  • Facing Criticism, Weber State Says It Will Be “More Nuanced”

    Facing Criticism, Weber State Says It Will Be “More Nuanced”

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | masa44/iStock/Getty Images | rawpixel

    After multiple censorship controversies over the past two months, Weber State University has announced a “revised approach” to how it enforces a sweeping anti–diversity, equity and inclusion law that the Utah Legislature passed in 2024. But it remains unclear exactly how it will change its actions.

    “With help from the Utah Commissioner of Higher Education, Weber State is currently reviewing our existing guidance, and where appropriate, will revise that guidance to be more nuanced in its understanding of where and how learning happens on our campuses,” interim president Leslie Durham wrote in a message to campus Friday. The Salt Lake Tribune reported earlier on the announcement.

    The goal, Durham wrote, “is to uphold the letter and spirit of the law, but also to ensure we remain fiercely committed to free speech, academic freedom, and fostering an environment where everyone at WSU feels welcome to express their thoughts, engage different viewpoints, and learn from one another.” She said that “we are learning from early and well-intentioned efforts at working within this new framework.”

    The university didn’t provide an interview or answer multiple written questions Tuesday. Richard Price, a political science professor, told Inside Higher Ed in an email, “As far as I know, faculty played no role in the creation of the existing approach and I doubt faculty will play a role in this process.”

    The Weber State controversies illustrate how universities have differed in implementing the anti-DEI laws that many red states have passed, and in navigating the Trump administration’s various anti-DEI orders and guidance that impact the whole nation. Shortly after Trump retook the White House, the American Association of University Professors issued a statement saying that “under no circumstances should an institution go further than the law demands.” Since then, state and federal government attacks on diversity programs and restrictions on speech have continued and universities have struggled with how to respond.

    Kristen Shahverdian, director of PEN America’s campus free speech program, has decried what she called “Weber State’s overreach.” But she told Inside Higher Ed Tuesday, “There’s a lot of confusion in how to interpret these bills that are vague and, in some cases, sloppily written.”

    Weber State made national headlines in October for censoring a conference ironically titled, Redacted: Navigating the Complexities of Censorship. A few days before the conference was to start, an official at the public institution ordered a student presenter to remove all references to DEI from their slides.

    Organizers ended up canceling the event after faculty pulled out in protest. The uncertified employee union held a teach-in instead, but it was also censored.

    That wasn’t the end of Weber State’s speech restrictions. Late last month, Apache writer Darcie Little Badger announced on Bluesky she was withdrawing as keynote speaker at the university’s annual Native Symposium because the university sent her a list of 10 prohibited words and concepts, including “bias,” “oppression” and “racial privilege.”

    “I will not humor this censorship,” Little Badger wrote. “It does a disservice to the stories I’m discussing & the audience, who deserve unfettered access to information & conversation.”

    ‘Prohibited Discriminatory Practices’

    Little Badger said the move seemed “to be the university‘s extreme attempt to comply with HB 261,” the same 2024 anti-DEI law the institution cited to censor the censorship conference. House Bill 261 bans Utah’s public colleges and universities from engaging in “prohibited discriminatory practices,” which lawmakers defined in a long list.

    That list includes affirmative action, consideration of “personal identity characteristics” in state financial aid decisions, anything “referred to or named” DEI and programs asserting that “meritocracy is inherently racist or sexist” or that an individual, by virtue of their “personal identity characteristics, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other individuals with the same personal identity characteristics.”

    The catalog of what constitutes “prohibited discriminatory practices” echoes the laws banning “divisive concepts” passed by other red states, which appear to borrow language from an anti-DEI executive order Trump signed in his first term.

    HB 261 explicitly says it doesn’t restrict academic research or “academic course teaching in the classroom.” The canceled censorship conference was sponsored by the university’s Student Access and Success division, and the Native Symposium was advertised on the university’s Student Success Center website, so neither might have been deemed “academic.”

    Shahverdian, of PEN America, stressed the difficulty in interpreting such laws.

    “How would a guest speaker be able to know if they’re engaging in any of these prohibited concepts?” she said, adding that it puts them in an “impossible position.”

    But Shahverdian said it’s good that Weber State is, as she put it, “acknowledging that they have not been implementing the law correctly.” In a country where fear is driving university officials to overcomply and leading to canceled speaking engagements, she noted that Little Badger’s refusal to go along appears to have elicited change.

    “In this moment, where we’re seeing so much censorship, it is a nugget of hope,” Shahverdian said.

    Source link

  • College Students Stress About Cost of Living Postgraduation

    College Students Stress About Cost of Living Postgraduation

    Graduation typically brings feelings of jubilation, but with the high cost of living and a competitive job market facing college graduates, students report feeling more anxious about their future prospects.

    A recent Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab found that nearly one in five college students say their top stressor is affording life after graduation. A similar share worry that they don’t have enough internship or work experience to be successful. 

    The survey, fielded in August, includes responses from over 5,000 college students, including 1,000 two-year and nearly 2,000 first-generation college students. 

    “Stability is really important to this generation of job-seekers,” said Shawn VanDerziel, chief executive officer at the National Association of Colleges and Employers, citing the organization’s own student surveys. “For the last several years, students regularly report to us that, in their first job, the most important thing is stability.”

    That means having a reasonable living standard as well as an employer who provides sufficient benefits, work-life balance and assurances against layoffs, VanDerziel said.

    Christine Cruzvergara, chief education officer of the job board Handshake, said the trend doesn’t surprise her because it mirrors similar data her organization collected earlier this year, which found that AI, changes to federal policy and a competitive job market are among the factors impeding students’ confidence after graduation.

    “The cost-of-living piece is very real,” Cruzvergara said. “That is, anecdotally, something that we do hear from students, even in the four-year space: ‘Everything is so expensive; I don’t know how I’m going to be able to live.’”

    Nationally, the American public is feeling strained financially. A recent McKinsey survey found that 45 percent of consumers said “rising prices or inflation” is their top concern; an additional 24 percent pointed to their “ability to make ends meet,” and 19 percent cited job security and unemployment.

    “I know no one is going to hire me in an economy like this,” one student at New Mexico State University–Dona Ana wrote in the “other” response option on the Student Voice survey.

    The cost-of-living squeeze has pushed more graduates to consider housing and grocery prices when selecting a city to live in.

    “In the past, you may have found other things that have risen to the top, like vibrant nightlife, environmental issues, recreation. All those things are still on the list, but cost of living is No. 1 in the minds of graduates today,” VanDerziel said.

    Handshake has seen more applicants looking toward smaller markets, or “B-list cities,” for their first destination after college, “because you might be able to get a good enough job that you can actually have the quality of life that you’re looking for at the same time,” Cruzvergara said.

    Internships needed: Students’ perception that they lack skills and experience points to a growing need for higher education leaders to provide work-based learning to prepare students for the workforce. Some institutions now guarantee experiential learning or internships as part of their strategic plans, Cruzvergara said.

    “I’m pleased to hear that students are concerned about internship opportunities, because that tells me that they are in tune with what’s happening in the world and the fact that employers see internship experience as being the best of everything,” VanDerziel said.

    Four-year students are more likely to have enrolled in college directly after graduating from high school, which could explain why this group of students is more likely to fret about their lack of work experience, Cruzvergara said.

    “If they didn’t do an internship, or they only did a part-time job in the summer, they might feel as if they’re at a disadvantage because they haven’t been in a more traditional white-collar work environment,” Cruzvergara said. 

    Older students (25 and up) or those who have worked full-time were less likely to cite anxieties over a lack of work or internship experience, despite being statistically less likely to complete an internship while in college. Handshake data from earlier this year found that about one in eight students have not participated in an internship and do not expect to before finishing their degree, in large part due to time constraints caused by other work or homework, or because they weren’t selected for an internship role.

    While some employers value all work equally, others believe it’s important for students to have work experiences specific to their intended professions, VanDerziel said.

    A soft landing: College and university career centers can help address some of students’ anxieties about graduation by connecting them to employers the traditional way at career fairs, Cruzvergara said.

    “In the face of emerging AI in more industries, roles and sectors, I actually find that what’s become really quite popular again for students in order to get a job or an internship is good old-fashioned networking,” Cruzvergara said.

    Attendance at networking and employer-led events hosted on Handshake (either virtual or for registration purposes) has tripled this year, according to the job board’s data.

    “I know it’s not new; career centers have been doing this for a long time, but do we need to do it more? Do we need to do it in a different way?” Cruzvergara said.

    Colleges should also consider their own departments as employers to host interns.

    “The school is a business in and of itself that has all these different functions,” Cruzvergara pointed out. “So how are you creating an internship within your own finance department? How are you creating an internship within your own legal department?”

    Source link

  • Martin University to “Pause” Operations

    Martin University to “Pause” Operations

    Martin University plans to wind down operations at the end of the current semester.

    College officials are calling the move a “pause,” stopping short of calling it a closure. They attribute the pause to financial challenges, declining enrollment and the lack of an endowment.

    “The Board has announced a pause in operations at the end of the semester. No final decision has been made regarding permanent closure. Discussions continue about how to carry forward Martin’s mission,” Martin spokesperson Keona Williams wrote to Inside Higher Ed by email.

    While the official language indicates a pause, it appears unlikely Martin will resume operations given its financial challenges and historical precedent, which shows that institutions are rarely resurrected after ceasing operations. Some, such as Knoxville College, have bucked that trend; the historically Black Tennessee college suspended operations in 2015, reopened in 2018 and is working to regain accreditation.

    Given Martin’s financial woes, Board of Trustees chairman Joseph Perkins noted in a news release that the private university needed “more community support,” especially for “first-generation college students who are fighting courageously to make a better life for their families.” Martin is seeking donations to continue operations through December. The college’s president Sean L. Huddleston stepped down late last month.

    Should Martin close, Indiana will lose its only predominantly Black institution.

    The decision to pause operations comes as Martin has teetered on the brink of closure for years and received warnings in its last three publicly available audits warning that it could go out of business due to significant financial challenges in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic.

    “The University has seen enrollment declines during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the enrollment has stabilized, it has not returned to the pre-pandemic levels the University once saw. The University has incurred additional liabilities during the year due to the results of additional borrowings deemed necessary by management and the Board of Trustees for operations, including the use of restricted funding for operational needs,” auditors wrote.

    Its latest available audit also noted that Martin “experienced a significant cyber-attack that resulted in extensive corruption of the University’s records that required significant resources for operations and recreation of the University’s records,” which “has taken a significant amount of time and effort due to significant turnover and instability in the finance and operation teams.”

    As noted by auditors, enrollment has also plunged in recent years.

    Martin had nearly 1,000 students in fall 2010, but by fall 2023, its head count was at just 223 students, according to federal enrollment data.

    Martin was founded in Indianapolis in 1977 to “serve low-income, minority, and adult learners,” and the majority of its students are Black, female and over 25, according to its website. The university was named in honor of civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. and St. Martin de Porres, a Peruvian saint who worked to achieve racial harmony in the 16th and 17th centuries.

    Source link

  • AI Can Help With Viewpoint Diversity Challenges (opinion)

    AI Can Help With Viewpoint Diversity Challenges (opinion)

    Viewpoint diversity and artificial intelligence are two of the most widely discussed challenges facing higher education today. What if we could address these two simultaneously, employing AI to create productive intellectual friction across different political and philosophical positions?

    Consider taking this approach: Whom do you ardently disagree with, philosophically or morally, but view as smart and rigorous in their analysis and arguments? I can think of one of my high school heroes, Ayn Rand, whose The Fountainhead I initially regarded as a powerful affirmation of creativity and innovation without knowing much about her deeper political ideology. This summer, I decided to read her collection of essays on capitalism, which I suspected I would disagree with at a fundamental level. Then I looked to AI. Could I engage Ayn Rand’s ideas through a large language model that would “disagree” with me, allowing me to experience intellectual friction with less at stake personally?

    I began my conversation with the chatbot Claude 3.5, asking it to play the role of Ayn Rand, by addressing her core argument: Capitalism is the only moral system because it honors the rights and liberty of every person to reap the benefits of their own creativity and effort without being coerced to give up some of what they have produced to “benefit” society. Here is how it went.

    Me: In your version of capitalism, how do humans/societies decide to produce something bigger than anyone could do alone? What if sending someone to the moon could never be coordinated through independent, voluntary contracts and instead requires some larger entity, like a government, to coordinate and incentivize? If democratic citizens vote to have the government organize a mission to the moon, why is that coercive?

    *Adjusting her glasses with a stern expression* (Stage cues provided by the bot)

    Rand bot: Your question reveals the very philosophical premises I reject. You speak of “democratic citizens” voting to achieve something “greater together”—but greater for whom? By what right do these citizens vote to expropriate the wealth of others for their collective fantasy?

    The fact that some men dream of reaching the moon does not give them the moral right to force others to fund their dream. If reaching the moon is truly valuable, let those who see that value risk their own capital, form their own companies and make voluntary contracts. Look at what private enterprises like SpaceX have achieved through voluntary cooperation and the profit motive!

    You present a false dichotomy between individual rights and large-scale achievement. The greatest achievements in human history—from the transcontinental railroad to the electric light—came from private individuals working through voluntary contracts, not government force. Even when multiple parties were involved, they chose to cooperate for mutual benefit.

    The moment you accept that it’s acceptable to violate individual rights for some “greater good,” you’ve accepted the premise of every dictator and looter in history. There is no such thing as a “right” to violate rights. A group’s desire, no matter how noble-sounding, does not trump an individual’s right to the product of their own effort.

    *Takes drag from cigarette* (more stage cues …)

    Would you care to explain why you believe some men have the right to enslave others for their collective goals?

    I was fully engaged at this point, and I wanted to expose her rigid thinking, so I raised the stakes.

    Me: Would you agree that public health might require a “collective response”? Let’s say that individuals acting independently have no incentive to invest in clean water, vaccines or databases that collect public health data. Is it better to allow millions of people to die from the spread of disease in the name of maximum individual freedom, or to have the government coordinate action to provide public health benefits to everyone?

    Rand bot: *Tapping cigarette ash with visible irritation*

    Your premise rests on the most dangerous of all moral fallacies— that the mere existence of a problem justifies the use of force to solve it. You speak of “public health” as if it were some mystical collective entity that supersedes individual rights. There is no such thing as “public health”—there are only individual human beings, each with the right to make their own decisions about their health and well-being.

    This back-and-forth went on for more than an hour, covering topics like innovation, market failures and unequal access to basic resources. I was worn out, so I closed the conversation.

    Me: I am arguing that humans can create mixed economic and political systems and that those systems can muddle along—imperfectly—and people may live with those compromises because they still have freedom while affording greater opportunity to their fellow citizens. You believe in an inevitable slide toward destruction and loss of freedom. I don’t see that slide happening in much of the democratic world. So compromise is possible. So I think we can work with this hybrid system—improve, find the right balance, and continue to advance a more perfect union.

    And then, “Ayn Rand” made her final summation:

    Rand bot: You want me to acknowledge that reality has not matched my darkest predictions. That humans have found ways to maintain significant freedom and progress despite what I see as moral compromise. And you argue that evidence matters—that decades of relative prosperity and innovation under mixed systems deserve consideration.

    I cannot and will not concede the fundamental moral principle: that force is force, whether applied by a dictator or a democratic majority. Your “muddling along” is built on a fundamental contradiction that I believe must eventually resolve itself—either toward freedom or toward force …

    I was impressed that the bot could articulate Rand’s core arguments, impersonate her direct writing and speaking style, question my own logic, provide specific examples, “reason” beyond the time and place of her original writing, and offer creative analogies (when pressed to explain the economic success of today’s welfare capitalism, she responded, “You are celebrating reaching the 2nd floor while I am pointing out that we could have built a skyscraper”). This was one of the most intellectually engaging 90 minutes I have spent in a long time.

    I wanted to check my reactions against the wisdom and judgment of one of our philosophy professors at Hamilton College, so I sent the entire exchange to him. He noted that the AI bot argued like a robot and relied too heavily on rhetoric rather than sound argumentation. Ultimately, the problem, as he sees it, is that “an AI Bot will never be able to genuinely distinguish between debating with the intent of ‘winning’ an argument and debating with the intent of arriving at a deeper understanding of the subject matter at hand.” It is also worth pointing out that debating across a screen, with AI or with friends and strangers, is partly why we are having so much trouble talking to each other in the first place.

    AI is not a substitute for what we learn in our philosophy classes. But there is something powerful about practicing our ideas with people across time and place—debating race with James Baldwin, asking Leonardo da Vinci to think about how we reconcile innovation with destruction.

    One of our faculty members worked with our technology team to create an AI agent based on thousands of documents and writings from our nation’s founders. At the end of this class on the founding of America, the students debated with “Alexander Hamilton” about the role of the central government, inherited wealth and his views on war. Perhaps the answers were a bit robotic, but they were based on Hamilton’s documented thoughts, and as our language models get better, the richness of the discussion and debate will grow exponentially.

    The best classes and teachers maximize learning by bringing opposing ideas into conversation. But we know that college students, faculty and many others in America find it very difficult to engage opposing views, especially those we find fundamentally objectionable. Ultimately, this must happen on a human-to-human level with skilled educators and facilitators. But can we also use AI to help us practice how we engage with difference, better formulate our arguments and ask deeper and more complex questions?

    AI can be part of the solution to our challenge of engaging with ideas we disagree with. If you disagree, try your argument with an AI bot first, and then let’s talk.

    Steven Tepper is president of Hamilton College.

    Source link

  • Closing Equity Gaps in CTE Programs for Black Students

    Closing Equity Gaps in CTE Programs for Black Students

    Black students enroll in career and technical education programs at rates on par with their peers, but studies suggest they’re overrepresented in service-oriented fields that lead to lower-wage jobs, and less likely to participate in CTE courses in potentially lucrative STEM fields.

    A new research brief, released last week by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, delved into such inequities and explored possible solutions based on qualitative interviews with Black program staff, current and former CTE students, members of workforce development organizations, training providers, researchers, and other CTE experts. The authors argue those voices are especially critical when federal legislation funding the programs—the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act, or Perkins V—is poised for reauthorization in fiscal year 2026.

    The report pointed out that in the 2022–23 academic year, Black students made up about 13 percent of high school students and about 15 percent of college students in CTE programs. But a 2020 analysis of CTE data in 40 states by Hechinger Report and the Associated Press found that Black students were less likely than their white peers to enroll in courses focused on science, technology, engineering, math and information technology, and more likely to take classes in fields such as hospitality and human services.

    A 2021 report by the Urban Institute also found that compared to their white peers, Black students in CTE courses had significantly lower grade point averages, lower rates of earning credentials or degrees at their first colleges, and a lower likelihood of finding a job in a related field. On average, Black participants in these programs earned more than $8,200 less than white students six years after starting CTE programs, controlling for the highest degree attained and sector of study. Earnings gaps worsened for Black students in online CTE programs; Black students who enrolled in those earned less than half of what their white peers did, despite having started in the same program in the same year, eventually earning the same degrees.

    “These disparities are major barriers to increasing the earning potential of Black workers and learners and to narrowing the racial wealth divide,” Joint Center president Dedrick Asante-Muhammad said in a news release.

    Lessons Learned

    In interviews with the Joint Center, Black CTE experts shared insights into some of the challenges of providing more equitable CTE programs.

    Some emphasized that Black CTE teachers, and technical instructors in general, are hard to recruit and retain because they can make better salaries working industry jobs in their fields, leaving students without mentors who look like them. In general, the experts raised concerns about CTE instructors lacking professional development, including on culturally responsive teaching.

    The research brief also suggested that Black communities don’t always trust CTE programs because historically, schools funneled Black students into low-quality technical programs. CTE programs hold a stigma for some potential students who still view them as pathways for students of color considered unlikely to attend college rather than a viable career step that doesn’t preclude higher education, the brief said.

    Experts also noted that while Perkins V funds require states to submit a local needs assessment, which involves reviewing enrollment and performance data for CTE students, data collection varies across states and gaps in data too often serve students poorly. For example, the mandatory accountability measures for Perkins V funds require data on CTE concentrators—high school students who finished at least two courses in the same CTE program—but that doesn’t include college students or students who dabble in CTE but don’t qualify as a concentrator.

    Co-author of the brief and Joint Center workforce policy director Kayla Elliott also acknowledged that the Trump administration’s recent decision to shift management of CTE programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor creates new uncertainty for the programs.

    “This raises real concerns for the program’s effectiveness and the efficiency of support services for state administrators,” she said in the release. “Some states have already reported waiting months for their Perkins funding with little communication or support from the administration.”

    But CTE experts also said Perkins V funding is flexible in ways that can help support Black students. For example, states can use up to 15 percent of the federal funds to drive innovation and implement new programs. States can also combine Perkins V funding with other funding sources, like the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, which can help states better align CTE programs and workforce development programs. The funds can also be used for career exploration activities to introduce Black students to these programs.

    The research brief offered recommendations to improve Black student access and outcomes in CTE, including increasing federal funding during the next reauthorization; improving retention and recruitment strategies for Black CTE teachers, including by raising instructor wages; and enhancing data collection standards. The authors also suggested CTE programs better align with workforce development efforts at the state level and do more engagement and outreach to help Black families better understand how these programs can lead to high-earning technical careers.

    Source link

  • Why Universities Need a Strategic Marketing Shift

    Why Universities Need a Strategic Marketing Shift

    This past week, presenting at the UPCEA MEMS conference in Boston, we explored a question that is becoming central to the future of higher education: What does it actually take to engage learners in lifelong learning with an institution?

    In a moment of rising enrollment volatility, shifting global dynamics and accelerating technological change, this question cuts to the heart of what universities must become. For decades, higher education has centered its marketing and enrollment strategy around discrete, program-level recruitment pipelines: find prospective students, convert them into a program and repeat the cycle for the next cohort.

    But today’s learners don’t behave in discrete cycles. Their lives aren’t structured around one big decision. They move fluidly across roles, industries and learning needs. They progress in fits and starts. They upskill to chase opportunity or reskill to navigate disruption. They return to learning not once, but many times over.

    And that means universities have a unique opportunity—if they choose to seize it.

    Rethinking Acquisition

    Rather than thinking transactionally—acquiring each enrollment anew—we can build relationships that honor a simple premise: If we provide value consistently, learners will keep choosing us.

    This is about rewriting the social contract. Not only with current students, but with alumni, midcareer professionals, online learners and the millions of individuals who may engage with us long before (or long after) a degree is on the table.

    Gone are the days when it is sufficient for a university to promise that earning a college degree is all that is needed for a long, successful career. Today’s learners and our broader society demand more.

    Instead, imagine a world where a learner begins with a short online experience or a noncredit course from an institution and immediately encounters a clear, welcoming pathway:

    Try something, learn something, earn a credential, return to learn more; stack the credentials and pursue a degree; return again for what’s next in their career and life.

    This is not an acquisition and retention strategy rooted in constraints. It is a relationship strategy rooted in community, trust and relevance.

    Lifetime learning becomes a shared journey and not simply a recruitment goal.

    Why Strategic Marketing Must Shift

    Much of higher ed’s traditional marketing infrastructure was built for a different era—one where programs were stable, pipelines were predictable and learners followed linear paths. Budgets are owned by program leaders, who allocate a portion to marketing “their” program. Central marketing functions may provide brand guidelines and a few templates. Marketing happens in silos across the institution.

    Challenges to this model today abound: from surging paid media costs and the rise of nontraditional learners to how AI is reshaping both labor markets and learner preferences. In this landscape, marketing single programs in isolation is not only inefficient—it’s misaligned with how learners actually behave.

    The more effective and learner-centered approach is clear.

    Market On-Ramps and Pathways, Not Just Destinations

    Instead of funding dozens of disconnected campaigns across schools and units, universities can invest centrally in marketing strategic portfolios of programs, composed of not just degrees but noncredit courses, certificates and more. This aligns messaging, reduces duplication, supports brand coherence, expands reach and—most importantly—mirrors the way different learner segments make decisions.

    People don’t all jump straight into an undergraduate degree or master’s program. They explore. They try something small and low-risk. They re-engage when life or work creates new urgency. They seek clarity, not complexity.

    Portfolio-based marketing meets them where they are.

    Building for Lifelong Value

    At the University of Michigan, we have been reorganizing our approach to online learning and marketing through this lens. Michigan Online, stewarded by the Center for Academic Innovation, serves as our unified destination for online, noncredit and for-credit learning opportunities.

    When a learner enters Michigan Online, our goal is not simply to direct them to a single offering; we welcome them into a coherent ecosystem.

    1. Pathways That Make Progression Clear

    We’ve aligned noncredit courses and certificates with for-credit opportunities, creating intentional pathways that help learners move from exploration to deeper engagement. When learners earn value early, the transition to degrees becomes more natural and more meaningful.

    1. CRM and Automation as Relationship Infrastructure

    We invested in CRM and marketing automation, bringing together noncredit and for-credit learner records into a single enterprise system. Just as importantly, we invested in the people and processes to use the tools well. This allows us to nurture learners over time, personalize recommendations, track cross-program engagement and create communications that feel relevant rather than transactional.

    1. A Shared Experience, Not a Siloed One

    By unifying messaging, branding and learner pathways, Michigan Online makes it easier for individuals to see themselves across programs, schools and stages of life. Instead of navigating institutional boundaries, they navigate opportunities.

    1. Reduced Reliance on Expensive Paid Media

    When the value is built into the learning itself—and when pathways clearly connect noncredit to for-credit—universities can rely less on costly late-funnel advertising. The relationship, not the ad spend, becomes the engine of enrollment.

    The Future Belongs to Institutions That Build Relationships, Not Funnels

    A lifetime-value approach to learners is not simply a marketing strategy. It is an institutional strategy. It asks universities to:

    • Design portfolios—not just degree programs
    • Welcome learners early—with value, not pressure
    • Create seamless transitions between credential types
    • Embrace personalization at scale
    • Invest in shared infrastructure instead of parallel campaigns
    • Build trust by offering meaningful learning at every stage

    Learners are telling us, through their behavior and their choices, that the old model no longer fits. They want ecosystems, guidance and clarity. They still want courses and content but they also want coaching and community. They want to return again and again, not because they’re targeted—but because they’re well served.

    The question for universities is not whether this shift is coming. It’s whether they will lead it. Leading means protecting a direct relationship with learners—so access, quality, privacy and long-term benefit remain anchored in educational values, not solely in market logic

    We believe that if institutions embrace this more holistic, value-centered approach—one rooted in lifelong relationship-building—they will not only strengthen enrollment resilience. They will also deepen their impact, broaden their reach and fulfill the promise at the heart of higher education: to support learners not just once, but throughout their lives.

    James DeVaney is associate vice provost for academic innovation and the founding executive director of the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan.

    James Cleaver is chief marketing officer for the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan.

    Carol Podschwadt is associate director of marketing for the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan.

    Source link

  • Making OBBBA Implementation Work for Students

    Making OBBBA Implementation Work for Students

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is the biggest shake-up to federal higher education policy in more than a decade. And while the bill passed on partisan lines, implementing it to maximize student success and postsecondary value requires real bipartisan cooperation. With negotiated rule making under way, and 2026 implementation deadlines looming, a new deep-dive report from Inside Higher Ed, “After Reconciliation: Higher Ed Reform and Where Left–Right Collaboration Matters Most,” looks at conservative, progressive and institutional priorities and perspectives on three key areas of OBBBA: institutional accountability for student outcomes; new loan limits and payment reforms; and changes to the Pell Grant program, including the introduction of Workforce Pell.

    Join the Discussion

    On Wednesday, Jan. 21 at 2 p.m. Eastern, Inside Higher Ed will host a live webcast discussion on the report and OBBBA’s impact on higher education. Register for that here. Download the free report here.

    Despite clear differences of opinion on various areas of the bill, many experts agree on the need for accountability, limits on excessive graduate debt and support for high-value training programs. 

    “The underlying principles here of stronger accountability for financial outcomes, of reining in excessive borrowing, especially in the graduate education space—those are bipartisan priorities that have been expressed for a long time,” says Michelle Dimino, director of education programs at the think tank Third Way. “These are conversations that we have been having in the higher education reform space for the last decade and beyond.”

    Common concerns also emerge around the tight timeline for adoption, the data infrastructure to support changes, aligning earnings regulations, handling repayment plan transfers with care, protecting the Pell Grant budget and more. Another challenge: execution by an Education Department in transition.

    “After Reconciliation: Higher Ed Reform and Where Left–Right Collaboration Matters Most” was written by Ben Upton. The independent editorial project is supported by Arnold Ventures.

    Source link