Tag: Jobs

China Aims for “Quality” Overseas Students With Entry Exam

China’s introduction of a standardized admissions exam for international students shows that efforts to build a world-class university system matter more to the country than increasing enrollments, according to experts.

Beginning with the 2026 intake, most international applicants will be required to take the China Scholastic Competency Assessment (CSCA), a centrally designed test intended to benchmark students from different education systems against a common academic standard.

The exam will be compulsory for recipients of Chinese government scholarships starting this year and later phased in more widely, becoming mandatory for all international undergraduate applicants by 2028.

It will be delivered primarily as an online, remotely proctored test, with some countries also offering off-line test centers.

Richard Coward, CEO at Global Admissions, an agency that helps international students apply to universities, said the policy was “one of the biggest changes” he had seen for international students studying in China.

“This is more about the shift in focus away from quantity to quality, which is happening all over the world. Previously China had the target of 500,000 students; now the target is towards world-class universities by 2050 with the double first-class initiative.”

“There is a great deal of variation in students with different academic backgrounds and it can be challenging to assess,” Coward said. “There are also many countries that don’t have the equivalent level of maths compared with China. This change aims to make all international applicants have the same standard so they’ll be able to follow the education at Chinese universities and so they are at least at the same level as local students.”

Under the new framework, mathematics will be compulsory for all applicants, including those applying for arts and humanities degrees.

Coward said this reflected “the Chinese educational philosophy that quantitative reasoning is a fundamental baseline for any university-level scholar.”

Those applying to Chinese-taught programs must also sit for a “professional Chinese” paper, offered in humanities and STEM versions. Physics and chemistry are optional, depending on program requirements. Mathematics, physics and chemistry can be taken in either Chinese or English.

Gerard Postiglione, professor emeritus at the University of Hong Kong, said the CSCA should be understood as part of a broader shift in China’s approach to internationalization.

“The increasing narrative in China in all areas is to focus on quality,” he said. “That also means in higher education. If China has the plan by 2035 to become an education system that is globally influential, there’s going to be more emphasis on quality.”

Postiglione added that the move also reflected how China approaches admissions locally.

“If you look at how China selects students domestically, there is no back door,” he said, pointing to the importance of the gaokao, China’s national university admissions test taken by local students. “The gaokao is the gaokao, and I don’t think there will be much of a back door for international students, either.”

He cautioned, however, that the framework may favor applicants with certain backgrounds.

“Language proficiency and subject preparation will inevitably advantage some students over others,” he said. “Students who have already studied in Chinese, or who come from systems with stronger mathematics preparation, may find it easier to meet the requirements.”

While the exam framework is centrally set, Postiglione said, individual universities are likely to retain autonomy over admissions decisions.

“The Ministry of Education will provide a framework and guidelines,” he said, “but it would be very difficult for a central agency to make individual admissions decisions across the entire system.”

Pass thresholds have not yet been standardized, and Coward said that in the future, universities may set minimum score requirements, but this is not in place yet.

He added that the additional requirement was unlikely to reduce demand. “Some more casual students may be deterred,” he said. “But for top-tier universities, it reduces administrative burden by filtering for quality early.”

In the longer term, though, “it signals that a Chinese degree is becoming more prestigious, which may actually increase demand from high-caliber students.”

Source link

January 15, 2026
Indiana University Cancels MLK Celebration Dinner

The Black Student Union held an annual dinner, first convened in 1969, honoring Martin Luther King Jr., that has been canceled this year.

Indiana University in Indianapolis canceled a dinner in honor of Martin Luther King Jr. hosted annually in January by the Black Student Union, Mirror Indy reported. This year’s would have been the 57th consecutive annual MLK dinner, which was first convened in 1969.

Officials in the Division of Student Affairs told the Black Student Union the event was canceled at the end of the fall semester, citing “budget constraints,” according to a letter the Black Student Union executive council posted on Instagram.

“For months prior, we had been diligently seeking guidance and confirmation on whether the dinner would be approved, funded and supported,” the executive council wrote. “This is not just about a dinner. This is about the erosion of Black traditions under vague justifications. This is about institutional decisions being made without Black voices at the table.”

In a letter to campus Tuesday, IU Indianapolis chancellor Latha Ramchand said, “The MLK Dinner is not going away—rather we are in a moment of transition,” and described a new task force that will “help us reimagine our affinity dinners and related events.” The task force will complete its work by April 10, she said.

In their response letter to the Division of Student Affairs, the Black Student Union’s executive council questioned whether the current political climate may have influenced administrators’ decision to cancel the dinner. The university in May closed its diversity, equity and inclusion office, which included the Multicultural Center and the LGBTQ+ Center; student organizations within the office were transferred to the Office of Student Involvement. A student with the Queer Student Union told Mirror Indy that the Harvey Milk Dinner, typically held in October, was also canceled this academic year.

Source link

January 15, 2026
Questions About Youth Perceptions of Access to American Dream

An impressively brilliant African American 14-year-old sent a thoughtful response to the column I published yesterday on the policing of Black men in America. He began by characterizing what I had written as “fascinating,” which could have meant a multitude of things coming from a teenager. He then explained that his eighth-grade English class included recent discussions about immigrant pursuits of the American dream. Accordingly, one major takeaway from those conversations with his teacher and peers was that many people come to the U.S. because it is perceived as a land of opportunity. My article complicated this presumption for him.

In addition to the racial profiling, harassment, abuse and police killings of unarmed Black Americans that I wrote about yesterday, this middle schooler’s perspective has me wondering how other youth his age, as well as collegians in the U.S. and abroad are thinking about the possibility of the American dream at this time for themselves and others. I am especially interested in knowing how attainable it feels among Asian, Black, Latino and Indigenous youth here and elsewhere across the globe. Juxtapositions of their perspectives with those of their white counterparts also fascinate me.

The Trump administration includes few people of color in leadership roles—certainly much, much fewer than in the Obama and Biden administrations. Programs and policies that were designed to ensure equitable opportunities for citizens who make our nation diverse have been ravaged (in some instances outlawed) during Donald Trump’s second presidential term.

Black, Latino and international student enrollments at Harvard University and other elite institutions have declined since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled race-conscious admissions practices unconstitutional. Immigrants are being threatened, terrorized and deported. It is possible that these challenges and realities have done little to erode immigrants’ and prospective international students’ faith in U.S. structures and systems. This is a researchable topic.

It would also be good for social scientists and education researchers to study how students in K–12 schools and on college campuses across the U.S. are appraising the equitable availability of the American dream to all citizens. Results collected via surveys and other research methods should be disaggregated by race, socioeconomic status, gender and gender identity, citizenship and documentation status, sexual orientation, religion, state and geographic region, political party, and other demographic variables. Those findings should be compared within and across groups. Furthermore, sophisticated analyses should be done at the intersection of identities (for example, perceptions of Asian American transgender immigrant youth).

In another column published earlier this week, I wrote about what I teach students in my classrooms. One statement therein seems worthy of amplification here: “To be absolutely sure, I have never instructed [students] to hate or in any way despise America.” I do, however, teach them truths about our nation’s racial past and present. Those lessons are not based on my opinions or so-called divisive ideologies, but instead rigorous statistics and other forms of high-quality, trustworthy data substantiate my teachings. As a responsible educator and citizen, I understand that the problem of inequitable access to the American dream requires a lot, including but not limited to consciousness raising, truth telling, reparations and restorative justice, and the implementation of equity-minded public policies, to name a few.

I want youth of color to love our country. I want immigrants who believe in the availability of the American dream to come here. But I also want access to the American dream to be fair and equitable. I want our nation to disable and permanently destroy structures and systems that cyclically reproduce disparate outcomes that disadvantage people who make our country beautifully diverse. I got a very real sense that the Black teenage boy who thoughtfully responded to what I wrote yesterday wants the same thing, too. Again, I think it would be “fascinating” to know how other adolescents and young adults, including those who are white, are thinking about who has full access to the American dream at this time.

Shaun Harper is University Professor and Provost Professor of Education, Business and Public Policy at the University of Southern California, where he holds the Clifford and Betty Allen Chair in Urban Leadership. His most recent book is titled Let’s Talk About DEI: Productive Disagreements About America’s Most Polarizing Topics.

Source link

January 15, 2026
N.C. Elections Board Rejects Campus Polling Centers

Some students protested the decision.

David Walter Banks/The Washington Post/Getty Images

Ahead of the 2026 primaries, the North Carolina State Board of Elections rejected a plan Tuesday to open an early-voting center on the Greensboro campus of North Carolina A&T State University, according to NC Newsline.

The Republican-controlled board also voted to close the existing early-voting centers at Elon University and Western Carolina University.

After the vote, a group of N.C. A&T students who traveled to Raleigh for the board meeting gathered in the boardroom, protesting the decision. But Francis De Luca, chair of the board, threatened to call the cops if they didn’t leave, according to the news outlet.

De Luca, who voted against the early-voting sites, said he’s not in favor of them for numerous reasons. “There’s no parking,” he said. “They may set aside parking; if it’s filled, you’re going to get a ticket. We don’t put sites where there’s no parking anywhere else.”

But Siobhan Millen, a Democratic member of the board who voted for the voting centers, said the move puts “student voting is in the crosshairs.”

Without voting sites on campus, students—including many who don’t own cars—will have to travel to off-campus precincts, though some in favor of axing campus polling centers have described them as redundant. Zayveon Davis, a voter engagement leader at N.C. A&T, said the HBCU would provide shuttles to take students to the nearest polling place.

Nonetheless, he called the decision “disappointing” and reflective of broader Republican-led efforts to restrict voting access, especially for marginalized communities.

“I hope that everybody leaves here knowing that your voice does matter. Your vote does matter,” he told NC Newsline. “And if it didn’t, they wouldn’t be working this hard to take it away.”

Source link

January 15, 2026
DOJ Report Compounds MSI Advocates’ Worries

Minority-serving institutions sustained another blow after the U.S. Department of Justice released a December legal report declaring funding to many of these institutions as unconstitutional. That memo could reach further than the Education Department’s move to defund some of these programs, ramping up uncertainty for the institutions.

Much like the Education Department in September, the DOJ argued these programs are unconstitutional because they require colleges to enroll a certain percentage of students from a particular racial or ethnic background to qualify, among other criteria. ED ultimately redirected hundreds of millions of dollars intended for Hispanic-serving institutions and other MSIs for fiscal year 2025; it remains unclear whether the DOJ memo will result in more of the same.

But the 48-page document offers new insight into the dangers a wide range of MSI grant programs could be facing and how the administration is legally justifying its stance against the institutions.

The Trump administration seems to be “doubling down” on its attacks on MSIs, offering some “legal justification for what they’ve already done, and in light of that justification, extending it to some additional programs that they did not pursue in the first go-around,” said John Moder, interim CEO of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities.

Mandatory Funds at Risk

Similar to ED, the report by the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel uses an expansive interpretation of the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard that barred considering race in admissions.

But the DOJ went further and called into question not just discretionary dollars but also congressionally mandated funds to MSIs, said Amanda Fuchs Miller, former deputy assistant secretary for higher education programs in the Biden administration and now president of the higher ed consultancy Seventh Street Strategies. The Education Department left mandatory funds alone in September, acknowledging in a news release that those funds “cannot be reprogrammed on a statutory basis,” but it would continue “to consider the underlying legal issues associated with the mandatory funding mechanism in these programs.”

The DOJ implied that “they don’t have to give out the mandatory money as required anymore—in their opinion,” Miller said. But as far as she’s concerned, “the executive branch has to enforce statutes,” including discretionary and mandatory funding authorized by Congress.

“They don’t have the authority to declare a statute unconstitutional,” she added.

In contrast, the legal memo argued that the president may be able to reject statutes altogether “even if only parts of them are noxious.” And it concluded that “the race-based portions” of various programs—including funds for Hispanic-serving institutions, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian–serving institutions and Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander–serving institutions—are “inseverable,” meaning the unconstitutional parts, according to the DOJ, can’t be removed.

The DOJ did, however, make some exceptions, including competitive grants to predominantly Black institutions (but not mandatory funds) and the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program; the department claimed these programs could be stripped of “race-based provisions.” The memo also scrutinized two TRIO programs, the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program and Student Support Services, but ultimately considered them constitutional, provided the grants aren’t used “to further racially discriminatory ends.”

This approach raises questions, Miller said. For example, the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program was specifically designed to bolster engineering and science programs at MSIs, so what would it mean to continue the program without MSI status as a factor? She also stressed that Native Americans aren’t a racial category, according to federal law, which the administration has acknowledged in the past. But the DOJ memo seems to muddy the administration’s take on the issue, she said, by arguing that Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian–serving institutions and Native American–Serving nontribal institutions rely on “racial and ethnic classifications rather than political classifications.”

Ultimately, “Congress needs to stand up and fight back for these schools that play key roles in their districts” and make sure its statutory authority is respected, Miller said.

Some members of Congress have called out the DOJ and ED for stepping out of bounds. Rep. Bobby Scott, a Virginia Democrat and ranking member of the House education committee, called the DOJ memo “deeply at odds with the fundamental goal of the [Higher Education Act] to ensure all students, regardless of their background, can access an affordable, quality degree.” Sen. Alex Padilla, chair of the Senate Congressional Hispanic-Serving Institutions Caucus, said the DOJ opinion “ignores federal law.” But lawmakers have yet to share a game plan on if or how they plan to push back.

Next Steps

What happens next is unclear.

Moder said the administration might withhold new funding for the flagged programs, rescind funds already given, or both.

In that case, institutions could sue, he said, but that’s an expensive ordeal for colleges and universities that, by definition, are underresourced. To qualify for most of the programs targeted by the DOJ, institutions are required to have low per-student expenditures compared to similar institutions, meaning they have relatively few resources to spend on students. They also need to serve at least half low-income students, in addition to a certain percentage of students from a particular racial or ethnic background.

“It’s an expensive proposition and a time-consuming proposition,” Moder said. Although MSIs could have already sued over their lost discretionary funds, “it’s not surprising that there hasn’t been a flurry of legal challenges presented to date.”

HACU has been defending HSIs against a legal challenge from the state of Tennessee and the advocacy group Students for Fair Admissions, after ED declined to stand up for the institutions. The lawsuit argued that Tennessee institutions don’t meet the requirement for HSIs—enrolling 25 percent Hispanic students—and miss out on federal funds; therefore, the federal criteria are discriminatory based on race. HACU has since asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing it’s a moot issue now that ED took away the discretionary funds Tennessee protests.

The hope is “it will leave the possibility of … Congress voting for renewed funding,” and eventually “a new administration to continue to administer it,” Moder said.

Deborah Santiago, co-founder and CEO of Excelencia in Education, an organization focused on Latino student outcomes, believes the DOJ report could have a positive twist: It offers more insight into how the administration is thinking about MSIs—and more fodder to fight back, she said.

The DOJ memo “went a little bit deeper on examples, and in doing so, created opportunities to understand where they’re coming from,” and to “challenge some of the basic framing and concepts that are in dispute,” said Santiago, who previously worked as deputy director of the White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics.

Notably, she said, the report didn’t take issue with the idea that “there is a clear federal policy goal in providing capacity-building for underresourced institutions.” Instead, it took aim at “racial quotas” and quibbled with whether “individual discrimination” against particular students or types of students occurred. But Santiago said it’s easy to argue back that MSI grants support underserved institutions, not individual students, and there’s a difference between racial quotas and enrollment thresholds.

“MSIs are about institutional capacity-building and not about redressing individual student discrimination. I think that was a false framing that they put out there,” she said. “At the core, this is about persistent structural disadvantages of institutions and how the federal government can fund them.” And when the federal government has limited funds to invest, “you can make the case” that increasing academic quality at institutions with a persistent lack of resources and a disproportionate number of historically underrepresented students “is a clear federal role and responsibility.”

She also pushed back on the idea that institutions that don’t get the money are discriminated against. By the same logic, “students who are not enrolled in military academies are being discriminated against because they’re not getting access” to investments in military academies, she said.

She believes that the DOJ memo will help hone how MSIs and their supporters advocate for the institutions to members of Congress and others.

“I think we need to reframe and make the case to our colleagues on the Hill,” she said.

Source link

January 15, 2026
Morris Brown College Fires President

Morris Brown College president Kevin James fought to regain the college’s accreditation. Now he’s out of a job without explanation.

Morris Brown College

Morris Brown College, a historically Black institution in Georgia, removed its president, effective immediately, after seven years on the job, the Board of Trustees announced Monday.

In a news release, the board thanked Kevin James for his leadership.

James “played a meaningful role in guiding the institution through critical seasons of growth, resilience, and transformation,” the release read. The board “wishes him well in his next chapter.”

The board’s announcement offered no explanation for James’s termination.

“Morris Brown College remains firmly committed to its students, its mission, and its long-term strategic vision,” Bishop Michael Mitchell, chair of the Board of Trustees, said in a statement. “This transition in leadership will help to ensure continuity as we move forward with the important work of strengthening and advancing the College.”

Under James’s tenure, the struggling college regained accreditation after nearly 20 years without it, restoring students’ access to federal financial aid. Enrollment also grew from about 20 students to more than 540, James wrote in a Facebook post Monday.

He said the Board of Trustees terminated his contract, which is slated to end in 2029, “without providing specific cause or substantive explanation” after a positive annual evaluation and strong performance reviews throughout his presidency.

He stressed that the timing is “troubling” for the college, which faces an accreditation-reaffirmation review in just a few weeks.

“I dedicated myself fully to the restoration and resurgence of Morris Brown College, and I stand firmly behind the progress we achieved together,” James wrote. “While I am deeply disappointed by the Board’s decision, I am grateful for the overwhelming support I have received from alumni, faculty, staff, students, and community partners. Thank you for believing in the vision and the work.”

The board named trustee Nzinga Shaw as the college’s interim leader.

Source link

January 14, 2026
Nebraska Chancellor’s Hasty Exit Raises Questions

Weeks after pushing through deeply unpopular program cuts, University of Nebraska–Lincoln chancellor Rodney Bennett has left his role six months early—with a $1 million golden parachute.

His exit at Nebraska has prompted faculty concerns about executive spending as questions linger about whether program cuts driven by Bennett were avoidable. NU system officials, however, have defended the cuts as necessary due to a recurring budget deficit and argued that Bennett’s exit package is what was owed to him—a mix of unpaid leave, deferred income, health-care benefits and the remainder of his contract set to expire in June.

For Bennett, this marks the second time since 2022 that he has left a job early, departing his role as president of the University of Southern Mississippi a year ahead of schedule after nearly a decade at the helm there.

(A UNL spokesperson said Bennett was not available for an interview with Inside Higher Ed.)

Now UNL will soon embark on a new chancellor search as tensions simmer over recent events, though NU system President Jeffrey Gold noted a “need for healing” before that process begins.

Contentious Cuts

Bennett’s budget-reduction plan was unveiled to much faculty dismay in November.

While he initially proposed cutting six programs, that was later whittled down to four: statistics, earth and atmospheric sciences, educational administration, and textiles, merchandising and fashion design. Four more programs will be “realigned” into two new schools, under the plan.

The program eliminations will cut 51 jobs at UNL, most from the faculty ranks.

Other actions taken include faculty buyouts, which are expected to save $5.5 million; budget reductions at four of UNL’s colleges; and the elimination of some administrative and staff roles.

Those cuts, already unpopular, sting more now after Bennett officially stepped down Monday with an exit package of $1.1 million—prompting faculty outrage over spending priorities.

“The university cannot credibly claim that it lacks the resources to sustain academic programs and faculty positions while simultaneously paying over a million dollars to a failed chancellor,” Sarah Zuckerman, president of the UNL chapter of the American Association of University Professors, said in a statement sent to Inside Higher Ed and other media outlets. “This payout exposes the administration’s financial crisis narrative as a matter of priorities, not necessity.”

But Gold, NU system president since July 2024, notes the exit package will not be funded by taxpayer dollars and said the decision to leave early was “mutually discussed” with Bennett, his family and senior leadership and was made with the “best interests” of the campus in mind.

“The separation agreement—all components of it—will not be funded either from state appropriations or tuition funds, but rather entirely through other university discretionary resources, meaning privately raised dollars,” Gold told Inside Higher Ed. “It’s always a balance, but an attempt was made, and I think in this instance, successfully, to not use the same dollars that are used to support our faculty and our staff and, most importantly, our students.”

Many faculty members are also seething about what they see as fuzzy math to justify the cuts.

An outside analysis, conducted by the AAUP, argued that instructional spending across the system has declined in recent years while administrative pay rises and that the cuts fell disproportionately on the academic side. The analysis also suggested that by increasing its endowment draw by 1.3 percent, bringing it up to 6 percent, UNL would have been able to avoid cuts.

Gold said that “perhaps the campus has seen that analysis,” but he has not. He largely dismissed the notion of increasing the endowment draw, noting such a move is “at the discretion of the Board of Directors and senior leadership of the [University of Nebraska] Foundation.” Gold also underscored that two of the four program closures were supported by the Academic Planning Committee, a group of faculty, staff, students and administrators—though that fact has done little to assuage the concerns of others who have protested the cuts as needless or flawed.

Faculty Tensions

Faculty have also accused Bennett of steamrolling them in the process to determine the cuts. In November, UNL’s Faculty Senate voted no confidence in Bennett and urged Gold to evaluate Bennett’s “continued fitness to serve” as chancellor.

The no-confidence resolution blasted Bennett for “failures in strategic leadership, fiscal stewardship, governance integrity, external relations, and personnel management.” Those concerns are among many complaints from faculty during Bennett’s tenure.

Regina Werum, a UNL sociology professor and member of UNL’s AAUP chapter, told Inside Higher Ed by email that Bennett had “no rapport with faculty” and was rarely seen on campus.

“The Chancellor’s style is best described as disengaged from and more accurately as disdainful of faculty, staff, and students. He keeps himself insulated and largely invisible on campus, making sure to be present for photo ops with superiors and dignitaries,” Werum wrote.

A former Southern Miss official who worked with Bennett at that campus offered a similar take. Speaking anonymously, the former official said Bennett was a rare sight on campus and tended to offer scripted remarks to faculty. That official also criticized Bennett’s inexperience with teaching and research, noting he stepped into the job with a student affairs background.

“The problem was he didn’t want you to know that he didn’t know things, and because of that, he wouldn’t ask questions,” the anonymous official said. “It was a conundrum. You would try to help him understand what was going on, but he didn’t want to admit that he didn’t understand it all.”

Bennett also enacted program cuts at Southern Miss, axing dozens of positions.

The former official said Bennett’s cabinet encouraged him to consider other options at Southern Miss, but he wasn’t interested in having those conversations and saw cuts as the only route to plug budget holes. The anonymous administrator also said Bennett often ignored faculty advice.

“When he reorganized the Gulf Coast campus, he put together two large committees, 30 people each, that worked for six months coming up with recommendations,” they said. “And then when he rolled out the plan for the Gulf Coast, there was a lot of stuff in there that none of the committees had ever discussed. People felt like they wasted a lot of time on these committees, and they were designed to give him cover for the changes he was going to make anyway.”

The former USM official believes it was an enrollment collapse at that campus, known as Southern Miss Gulf Park, that hastened Bennett’s exit from a job he had held since 2013. Bennett initially announced in January 2021 that he planned to step down when his contract ended in June 2023. However, Bennett was officially out by June 2022, with no explanation.

Months later, a member of the Institutions of Higher Learning Board of Trustees, which oversees Southern Miss and other universities, told local media he was “embarrassed” by the enrollment collapse at the satellite campus, which plunged by more than 50 percent from 2011 to 2022.

Despite sharp faculty criticism, Gold praised Bennett for his time as chancellor.

“For the 18 months that I had the privilege of working with Chancellor Bennett, I really enjoyed working with him. I found him to be very thoughtful, easy to work with, a very solid human being with a very strong love of higher education, and particularly public higher education,” Gold said.

But if Gold felt differently, he wouldn’t be able to say so.

A nondisparagement agreement in Bennett’s separation agreement prevents certain university and system officials, including Gold and members of the Board of Regents, from making “any negative or disparaging comments or statements” about the now-former Nebraska chancellor.

Source link

January 14, 2026
Calif. College of Arts to Close, Sell Campus to Vanderbilt

As part of its national expansion, Vanderbilt has purchased the California College of the Arts campus, which is closing.

Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed

California College of the Arts will close by the end of the 2026–27 academic year amid enrollment declines that have rendered its business model unsustainable, officials announced.

But the Wednesday announcement at a press conference at San Francisco’s City Hall came with surprising fanfare. Though CCA is going away, Vanderbilt University is stepping in to purchase its campus, giving the private institution in Tennessee a foothold on the West Coast.

Following the closure, Vanderbilt will assume ownership of the campus and “establish undergraduate and graduate programming, including art and design programs,” and maintain archival materials from the college, CCA president David C. Howse wrote in an announcement.

The move comes after recent financial struggles for CCA, which laid off 23 employees in 2024 and closed other vacant positions to address a $20 million budget gap. While the private college raised nearly $45 million recently, those funds were evidently not enough to stave off closure.

CCA enrolled 1,308 students in fall 2024, according to recent federal data, down from a recent high of nearly 2,000 students in fall 2016.

Officials have not made details of the transaction publicly available.

Vanderbilt’s takeover of the San Francisco campus is the latest national push from the university, which has pursued an ambitious growth plan in recent years. Vanderbilt is currently leasing a campus in New York City and building another in West Palm Beach, Fla., as announced in 2024.

Vanderbilt chancellor Daniel Diermeier told Inside Higher Ed last fall that the university was exploring a site in San Francisco and noted the booming artificial intelligence scene in the city was part of the appeal for a campus there.

While at least 16 nonprofit institutions announced closure plans last year, California College of the Arts appears to be the first to do so in 2026, coming less than two weeks into the new year.

Source link

January 14, 2026
UNC’s App Redesign Drives Student Engagement

What was once an underused mobile app at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has been rebuilt to serve as a central hub for student information and services.

The app, Hello Heels, was relaunched during first-year orientation last fall after undergoing a redesign following input from students through advisory boards, focus groups and surveys.

Since the relaunch, the app now draws about 90,000 page views per week from roughly 37,000 users—up from 10,000 page views and 6,000 users before the redesign.

Elizabeth Poindexter, executive director of communications and special projects in UNC’s Office of Student Affairs, said students rely on the app for “real-time” updates on everything from bus tracking to dining hall offerings.

“Nothing thrills me more than running to the dining hall to grab my own lunch and seeing a student using the app or talking to their friends about it,” said Poindexter.

She added that student feedback has allowed the app to become a multifaceted “dynamic space,” featuring modules on career services and health and wellness and an up-to-date events calendar.

Poindexter also said the redesigned app has proven cost-effective, saving more than $40,000 in new student and family programs by eliminating the need for duplicative services. Instead of costly printed materials, the app provides real-time agenda updates and announcements.

“The more people hear about that cost savings, the more interested in and engaged with the app they become,” said Poindexter.

The approach: Poindexter said student input came from a diverse group, including undergraduates and graduate, transfer and international students.

“We really had a good spread of students who are representative of the student body at large, and they had some incredible recommendations,” said Poindexter, including suggestions to “overhaul” and “refresh” the health and wellness and career services modules.

She added that other features, such as real-time updates on recreation center occupancy, dining hall hours and integration with academic tools like Canvas, also arose directly from student feedback.

The app includes an opt-in messaging feature that allows campus offices to send targeted updates to students who choose to receive them. Poindexter said the most popular channels come from the financial well-being center and the mental health and wellness center.

The financial well-being center sends weekly money tips and appointment reminders, while the mental health and wellness center shares well-being messages during high-stress periods like finals, which she said students respond positively to.

The app also gathers in-app survey responses. Of roughly 250 respondents, 98 percent said they plan to continue using Hello Heels.

“That is why it’s been so successful,” Poindexter said. “We have student voices integrated every step of the way.”

What’s next: Poindexter said part of the redesign involved partnering with UNC’s business school to ensure the app’s long-term sustainability and continued improvement.

“It’s been really wonderful to see that we can have this universitywide impact and improve the student experience in how we communicate with them,” she said.

Poindexter recommended that higher education leaders take a close look at their own media, from mobile apps to online newsletters, and use student feedback to make sure those tools are actually engaging and informing their target audience.

“Our best advocates are our students, and they have really useful insights decision-makers should consider,” she said.

Get more content like this directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.

Source link

January 14, 2026
SHEEO Releases Annual State Priorities Survey

Affordability has always been a buzzword for lawmakers on Capitol Hill, but polling shows that it’s becoming increasingly popular among state higher education agencies as well.

According to the latest annual State Priorities survey from the State Higher Education Executive Officers, college affordability jumped from the sixth-most-important policy issue among higher ed executives in 2025 to the second most this year.

SHEEO researchers emphasized that affordability has “consistently [been] among the top priorities” for the roughly 45 state executives surveyed each year; the average score from respondents this year only increased 0.1 points on a 1-to-5 scale. Nonetheless, they agreed that the increase represents a significant and timely change—one that was likely influenced by the political climate in Washington.

“Affordability is the key overarching issue for policymakers heading into the 2026 midterm election, and state higher education leaders are certainly not immune from pressure to lower costs,” said Tom Harnisch, SHEEO’s vice president for government relations. “So there’s going to be, I foresee, continued legislative efforts to hold the line on tuition, make increased investments in financial aid and address other areas that are related to college costs.”

The increased focus on affordability has also been reflected in state legislation; 33 states indicated that they had instituted a tuition freeze and/or limit in at least one public higher education sector in the past five years. Another 20 have considered legislation to create or expand statewide promise programs, which provide free or significantly reduced college tuition for eligible students.

But state systems still have work to do to address public concerns. Roughly 60 percent of all adults say cost is the biggest barrier preventing students from enrolling in or completing a postsecondary degree, according to a report from the left-leaning think tank New America.

Other key policy issues include economic and workforce development (which held its place at No. 1), higher education’s value proposition (No. 3), and college completion/student success (No. 5), the SHEEO survey shows. A topic that had not previously been included in SHEEO surveys also gained prominence this year: state impacts from federal policy changes, which placed sixth on the list of 25 issues.

Collectively, Harnisch said, this year’s results, and the relatively consistent results of recent years, reflect a slow but steady transition concerning who is responsible for bearing the cost of college.

“It just shows the overarching cost shift from states to students, and associated with that cost shift is the need for students to get a job, to help pay for their education and associated student debt,” he explained. “These are all downstream effects of that.”

SHEEO researchers also noted that while state budgets for higher ed range widely, funding has declined over all since the COVID-19 pandemic and its “record state budget surpluses.” The major funding cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will likely only make higher education budgets tighter, they added.

“Many states with biannual budgets set them in 2025, so they will not be in budget sessions again until 2027. But those states that do have budgets in 2026 are more likely to face changes, and higher education is often most vulnerable to those changes,” Harnisch said. “So as more states have budget shortfalls, revenue growth is softening and there’s increased competition for limited state funding, states are going to be increasingly challenged on the affordability front.”

Still, despite looming budget cuts, “unstable federal funding streams and intensifying state and federal political pressures,” SHEEO says there are reasons for optimism.

Concerns about completion of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid dropped nine spots to the 18th-most-important issue for higher leaders this year. And despite the looming predictions of a major demographic cliff, which is slated to take effect in 2026, enrollment declines dropped from the seventh-most-important issue in 2025 to 16th most important this year.

If anything, SHEEO hopes that enrollment will continue to climb as students pursuing eligible short-term education and training programs gain access to Pell Grants for the first time starting on July 1, under a new program called Workforce Pell.

“[The year] 2026 holds a lot of unknowns as we look to see what state legislators will prioritize and how changes at the federal level will impact states,” Harnisch said in a news release about the report. But as “economic and workforce development continues to be top of mind, and with the implementation of Workforce Pell rolling out later this year, we’re optimistic that states will continue to make advances in addressing workforce needs.”

Source link

January 14, 2026