Tag: Key

  • Daring students to take risks and be wrong is key to solving the campus culture wars

    Daring students to take risks and be wrong is key to solving the campus culture wars

    Goodbye then, the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act parts A3, A4, A7 and parts of A8 – we hardly knew you.

    The legal tort – a mechanism that seemed somehow to be designed to say “we’ve told the regulator to set up a rapid alternative mechanism to avoid having to lawyer up, but here’s a fast track way to bypass it anyway”, is to be deleted.

    The complaints scheme – a wheeze which allowed an installed Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom to rapidly rule on whatever it was that the Sunday papers were upset about that week – will now be “free” (expected) to not take up every dispute thrown its way.

    Students themselves with a complaint about a free speech issue will no longer have to flip a coin between a widely respected way of avoiding legal disputes and an untested but apparently faster one operated by the Director which was to be flagged in Freshers’ handbooks. The OIA it is.

    Foreign funding measures – bodged into the act by China hawks who could never work out whether the security services, the Foreign Office or the Department for Education were more to blame for encouraging universities to take on Chinese students – will now likely form part of the revised “Foreign Influence Registration Scheme” created by the National Security Act 2023.

    A measure banning universities from silencing victims of harassment via a non-disclosure agreement will stay, despite OfS saying it was going to ban NDAs anyway – although nobody seems able to explain why their use will still be fine for other victims with other complaints.

    And direct regulation of students’ unions – a measure that had somehow fallen for the fanciful idea that their activities are neither regulated nor controlled by powerless university managements and the Charity Commission – will also go. The “parent” institution will, as has always been the case, revert to reasonably practicable steps – like yanking its funding.

    As such, save for a new and vague duty to “promote” free speech and academic freedom, the new government’s intended partial repeal of legislation that somehow took the old one two parliaments to pass – a period of gestation that always seemed more designed to extend the issue’s prevalence in the press than to perfect its provisions – now leaves the sector largely back in the framework it’s been in for the best part of 40 years.

    That the Secretary of State says that all of the above is about proceeding in a way that “actually works” will raise an eyebrow from those who think a crisis in the academy has been growing – especially when the government’s position is that the problem to be fixed is as follows:

    In a university or a polytechnic, above all places, there should be room for discussion of all issues, for the willingness to hear and to dispute all views including those that are unpopular or eccentric or wrong.

    Actually, that was a quote from Education Secretary Keith Joseph in 1986, writing to the National Union of Students over free speech measures in the 1986 act. But Bridget Phillipson’s quote wasn’t much different:

    These fundamental freedoms are more important—much more important—than the wishes of some students not to be offended. University is a place for ideas to be exposed and debated, to be tried and tested. For young people, it is a space for horizons to be broadened, perspectives to be challenged and ideas to be examined. It is not a place for students to shut down any view with which they disagree.

    The message for vice chancellors who fail to take this seriously couldn’t have been clearer – “protect free speech on your campuses or face the consequences”. But if it’s true that for “too long, too many universities have been too relaxed about these issues”, and that “too few took them seriously enough” – what is it that that must now change?

    Back to the future

    There is no point rehearsing here the arguments that the “problem” has been overblown, centring on a handful of incidents in a part of the sector more likely to have been populated by the lawmakers and journalists whose thirst for crises to crack down on needs constant fuel. And anyway, for those on the wrong end of cancellation, the pain is real.

    There is little to be gained here from pointing out the endless inconsistencies in an agenda that seemed to have been designed to offer a simplistically minimalist definition of harassment and harm and a simplistically maximalist definition of free speech – until October 7th 2023 turned all that on its head.

    There isn’t a lot of benefit in pointing out how unhelpful the conflation between academic freedom and freedom of speech has been – one that made sense for gender-critical academics feeling the force of protest, but has been of no help for almost anyone involved in a discipline attempting to find truth in historic or systemic reasons for other equality disparities in contemporary society.

    Others write better than me, sometimes in ways I don’t recognise, sometimes in ways I do, about the way in which the need to competitively recruit students, or keep funders happy, or to not be the victim of a fresh round of course cuts inhibits challenge, drains the bravery to be unpopular, and is the real cause of a culture of “safetyism” on campus.

    And while of course it is the case that higher education isn’t what it was – which even in its “new universities” manifestations in the 1960s imagined small parts of the population engaging in small-group discussions between liberal-minded individuals able to indulge in activism before a life of elitism – I’ve grown tired of pointing out that the higher education that people sometimes call for isn’t what it is, either.

    What I’m most concerned about isn’t a nostalgic return to elite HE, or business-as-usual return to whatever it was or wasn’t done in the name of academic freedom or freedom of speech in a mass age – and nor is it whatever universities or their SUs might do to either demonstrate or promote a more complex reality. I’m most concerned about students’ confidence.

    The real crisis on campus

    Back in early 2023, we had seen surveys that told us about self-censorship, pamphlets that professed to show a culture of campus “silent” no platforming, and polling data that invited alarm at students’ apparent preference for safety rather than freedom.

    But one thing that I’d found consistently frustrating about the findings was the lack of intelligence on why students were responding the way they apparently were.

    For the endless agents drawing conclusions, it was too easy to project their own assumptions and prejudices, forged in generational memory loss and their own experiences of HE. Too easy to worry about the 14 per cent of undergrads who went on to say they didn’t feel free to express themselves in the NSS – and too easy to guess “why” that minority said so.

    As part of our work with our partners at Cibyl and a group of SUs, we polled a sample of 1,600 students and weighted for gender and age.

    We found that men were almost ten percentage points higher than women on “very free”, although there was gender consistency across the two “not free” options. Disabled students felt less free than non-disabled peers, privately educated students felt more free than those from the state system, and those eligible for means-tested bursaries were less confident than those who weren’t.

    In the stats, those who felt part of a community of students and staff were significantly more likely to feel free to express themselves than those who didn’t – and we know that it’s the socio-economic factors that are most likely to cause feelings of not “fitting in”.

    But it was the qualitative comments that stuck with me. Of those ticking one of the “not free” options, one said that because the students on their course were majority white students, they “often felt intimidated to speak about certain things”.

    Another said that northern state school students are minorities – and didn’t really have voices there:

    Tends to be posher middle class private school educated students who are heard.

    Mature students aren’t part of the majority and what I have said in the past tends to get ignored.

    Many talked about the sort of high-level technical courses that policymakers still imagine universities don’t deliver. “Engineering doesn’t leave much room for opinion like other courses”, said one. “Not a lot of room in my degree for expression” said another.

    And another gave real challenge to those in the culture wars that believe that all opinions are somehow valid:

    My course doesn’t necessarily allow me to express my freedom as everything is researched based with facts.

    Ask anyone that attempted to run a seminar on Zoom during Covid-19, and you get the same story – switched-off cameras, long silences, students seemingly afraid to say something for fear of being ostracised, or laughed at, or “getting it wrong”.

    As a former SU President put it on the site in 2023:

    This year there have been lecture halls on every campus stacked with students who don’t know how to start up a conversation with the person sat next to them. There were emails waiting to be sent, the cursor flashing at the start of a sentence, that the struggling student didn’t know how to word… This question is whether or not the next generation is actually being taught how to interact and be comfortable in their own skin… They have to if they’re claiming to.

    Freedom from fear?

    The biggest contradiction of all in both the freedom of speech and academic freedom debates that have engulfed the sector in recent years was not a lack of freedom – it was the idea that you can legislate to cause people to take advantage of it:

    In lectures and seminars there is often complete silence. The unanimity of asking a question or communicating becomes daunting when you’re the only one.

    Fear you’ll be laughed at or judged if you get it wrong

    In terms of lectures, the students in my class feel shy to share opinions which affects me when I want to share.

    Again this is a personal thing I don’t often like expressing my points of view in person to people I don’t know very well. Also they probably won’t be listened to so I don’t see the point.

    I feel very free amongst my other students in our WhatsApp groups (not governed by the university). However, freedom of expression in support sessions often ends up not occurring as everyone is anxious due to how the class has been set up.

    Once in class I simply got one word mixed up with another and the lecturer laughed and said. ‘yes…well…they do mean the same thing so that has already been stated.’ Making me and also my fellow students reluctant to ask any questions at all as we then feel some questions are ridiculous to ask. How are we to express our thoughts if we feel we will be ridiculed or made to feel ridiculous?

    For those not on programmes especially suited to endless moral and philosophical debates, a system where the time to take part in extracurriculars is squeezed by part-time work or public transport delays is not one that builds confidence to take part in them.

    The stratification of the sector – where both within universities and between them, students of a particular type and characteristic cluster in ways that few want to admit – drives a lack of diversity within the encounters that students do have in the classroom.

    And even for those whose seminars offer the opportunity for “debate”, why would you? Students have been in social media bubbles and form political opinions long before they enrol. And Leo Bursztyn and David Yang’s paper demonstrates that people think everyone in their group shares the same views, and that everyone in the outgroup believes the opposite.

    As Harvard political scientist David Deming argues here:

    Suppose a politically progressive person offers a commonly held progressive view on an issue like Israel-Palestine, affirmative action, or some other topic. Fearing social sanction, people in the out-group remain silent. But so do in-group members who disagree with their group’s stance on that particular issue. They stay silent because they assume that they are the only ones in the group who disagree, and they do not want to be isolated from their group. The only people who speak up are those who agree with the original speaker, and so the perception of in-group unanimity gets reinforced.

    Deming’s solution is that universities should tackle “pluralistic ignorance” – where most people hold an opinion privately but believe incorrectly that other people believe the opposite.

    He argues that fear of social isolation silences dissenting views within an in-group, and reinforces the belief that such views are not widely shared – and so suggests making use of classroom polling tech to elicit views anonymously, and for students to get to know each other privately first, giving people space to say things like “yes I’m progressive, but my views differ on topic X.”

    Promoting free speech?

    Within that new “promote” duty, it may be that pedagogical innovation of that sort within the curriculum will make a difference. It may also be that extracurricular innovation – from bringing seemingly opposed activist groups on campus together to listen to each other, through to carefully crafted induction talks on what free speech and academic means in practice – would help. Whether it’s possible to be positive about EDI in the face of the right to disagree with it remains to be seen.

    Upstream work on this agenda might help too – it’s odd that a “problem” that must be partly about what happens in schools and colleges is never mentioned in the APP outreach agenda, just as it’s frustrating that the surface diversity of a provider is celebrated while inside, the differences in characteristics between, say, medical students and those studying Business and Management are as vast as ever.

    Students unions – relieved of direct scrutiny on the basis that they are neither “equipped nor funded” to navigate such a complex regulatory environment – might argue that the solution is to equip them and fund them, not remove the regulation. They might also revisit work we coordinated back in 2021 – much of which was about strengthening political debate in their own structures as a way to demonstrate that democracy can work.

    Overall, though, someone somewhere is going to get something wrong again. They’ll fail to act to protect something lawful; or they’ll send a signal that something was OK, or wrong, when they should have decided the opposite.

    As such, I’ve long believed that the practice of being “wrong” needs to be role-modelled as strongly as that of being right. If universities really are spaces of debate and the lines between free speech and harassment are contested and context-specific, the sector needs to find a way to adjudicate conflict within universities rather than leaving that to the OIA, OfS, the courts or that other court of public opinion – because once it gets that far, the endless allegations of “bad faith” on both sides prevent nuance, resolution and trust.

    Perhaps internal resolution can be carried out in the way we found in use in Poland on our study tour, using trusted figures appointed from within – and perhaps it can be done by identifying types of democratic debate within both academic and corporate governance that give space to groups of staff and students with which one can agree or disagree.

    If nothing else, if Arif Ahmed is right – and “speech and expression were essential to Civil Rights protestors, just as censorship was their opponents’ most convenient weapon”, we will have to accept that “nonviolent direct action seeks to… dramatize an issue that it can no longer be ignored” – and it has as much a place on campus as the romantic ideals of a seminar room exploring nuance.

    Lightbulb moments need electricity

    But even if that helps, I’m still stuck with the horse/water/drink problem – that however much you promote the importance of something, you still need to create the conditions to take up what’s on offer. What is desired feels rich – when the contemporary student experience is often, in reality, thin. What if the real problem isn’t student protest going too far, but too few students willing to say anything out loud at all?

    Students (and their representatives) left Twitter/X/Bluesky half a decade ago, preferring the positivity of LinkedIn to being piled-onto for an opinion. Spend half an hour on Reddit’s r/UniUK and you can see it all – students terrified that one wrong move, one bad grade, one conversation taken the wrong way, one email to a tutor asking why their mark was the way it was – will lead to disaster. The stakes are too high, and the cushion for getting anything wrong too thin, to risk anything.

    Just as strong messages about the importance of extracurricular participation don’t work if you’re holding down a full-time job and live 90 minutes from campus, saying that exploring the nuances of moral and political debate is important will fall flat if you’re a first-in-family student hanging on by a thread.

    Much of this all, for me, comes back to time. Whatever else people think higher education is there to do, it only provides the opportunity to get things wrong once the pressure is off on always getting things right. Huge class sizes, that British obsession with sorting and grading rather than passing or failing, precarious employment (of staff and students) and models of student finance that render being full-time into part-time are not circumstances that lead anyone to exploring and challenging their ideas.

    Put another way, the government’s desire that higher education offers something which allows horizons to be broadened, perspectives to be challenged and ideas to be examined is laudable. But if it really wants it happen, it does have to have a much better understanding of – and a desire to improve – the hopeless precarity that students find themselves in now.

    Source link

  • Key Trends in the Era of the Modern Learner

    Key Trends in the Era of the Modern Learner

    We are at a pivotal point in higher education, the Era of the Modern Learner. This new era, shaped by evolving technology, changing cultural dynamics, and shifting student priorities, is revolutionizing how colleges and universities engage with students.

    Modern Learners are not who they used to be. They are:

    • Discerning, using data and online resources to thoroughly research programs and institutions.
    • Highly Informed and Goal-Oriented, demanding personalized experiences tailored to their specific needs.
    • Focused on ROI, seeking educational options that offer a clear return on investment and equip them with practical skills for future financial viability.

    To succeed in the Era of the Modern Learner, institutions must adapt and embrace a Unified Enrollment Approach that seamlessly integrates marketing and communications across the campus, ensuring a consistent brand message reaches all audiences. This means moving beyond traditional demographic-driven strategies and embracing the commonalities that bind today’s diverse student population as Modern Learners.

    The 2025 Marketing and Enrollment Management Benchmarks Report offers higher education leaders with the knowledge and insights needed to effectively navigate the landscape.

    Key Trends Impacting Higher Education Marketing and Enrollment Management

    The Rise of Stealth Applicants

    A growing number of students prefer to explore college options privately, submitting applications directly without engaging with admissions offices beforehand. This trend, known as stealth applying, presents a challenge for institutions to connect with these elusive prospects, requiring refined media spending strategies to justify investments and adapt to this evolving application behavior.

    Program Demand Shifts

    Analysis of site traffic reveals significant shifts in program demand. Healthcare and vocational training programs are experiencing a surge in interest, reflecting a growing societal focus on healthcare careers and a shift towards practical skills and direct employment pathways. Conversely, traditional arts and humanities fields are facing declines, suggesting students are prioritizing fields perceived as more job ready.

    The Power of Organic Search

    Organic search remains a highly cost-effective way to attract prospective students, with over a third of all education website visits originating from organic search. Institutions need to prioritize website performance and optimize their online presence to capture this valuable traffic source.

    Digital Advertising Dominance

    Institutions are strategically increasing their investment in digital advertising, particularly across platforms like Google, social media, and mobile video. This shift reflects the Modern Learner’s digital-first consumption habits and the effectiveness of these channels in driving awareness and conversions.

    AI-Powered Personalization

    AI-powered tools, such as Google’s Performance Max, are transforming how institutions optimize advertising campaigns and personalize content delivery. These tools leverage machine learning to enhance ad performance across multiple Google channels, leading to more efficient and effective outreach.

    2025 Key Recommendations for Higher Ed Leaders

    • Break Down the Walls:
      Embrace a unified approach to enrollment that integrates marketing and communication strategies across the entire institution.
    • Be Transparent and Demonstrate Value:
      Prioritize transparency and demonstrate value, providing clear information about costs, program details, and career outcomes.
    • Go Digital or Go Home:
      Develop a robust digital marketing strategy, leveraging the power of organic search, paid advertising, and video content.
    • Leverage the Power of AI:
      Harness the power of AI, utilizing tools like Google Performance Max to optimize campaigns and personalize content delivery.
    • Stay Agile and Responsive:
      Continuously adapt to the evolving needs and preferences of the Modern Learner.

    By understanding these trends and proactively adapting strategies, higher education institutions can effectively engage Modern Learners, navigate the evolving landscape, and achieve enrollment success in 2025 and beyond.

    For a more in-depth analysis of the current higher education marketing and enrollment landscape, download our comprehensive Marketing and Enrollment Management report. It’s packed with EducationDynamics’ proprietary data, insights and actionable strategies to help you grow enrollment.

    EducationDynamics is dedicated to helping colleges and universities navigate these complex challenges. We offer proven solutions to help you implement these key recommendations and achieve your enrollment goals. Contact us today to learn how we can partner with you to reach the Modern Learner and thrive in the evolving higher education environment.

    Source link

  • 7 Key Considerations When Choosing Cloud Partner for Higher Education

    7 Key Considerations When Choosing Cloud Partner for Higher Education

    Data privacy and compliance in educational cloud solutions is no more a choice, but a mantra. Colleges and universities can get a lot out of moving to the cloud, but picking the right cloud partner is very important. An effective partner can help organizations improve their processes, improve student experience, and work more efficiently. When your institution decides on a cloud partner, you may have to consider these 7 factors that are discussed in the blog:

     

    Data Privacy and Compliance in Educational Cloud Solutions. Why?

    Safeguarding sensitive student and institutional data is an absolute necessity in the field of higher education. It has become a mandate that higher education institutions establish robust privacy and compliance standards, as data breaches have increased by 75% between 2021 and 2023.

    To protect data across international boundaries, a trustworthy cloud partner must comply with regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and ISO 27001. To give just one example, research has shown that 63 percent of students give higher priority to educational institutions that exhibit robust data protection measures. By selecting a cloud service that offers encryption, access control, and frequent audits, you are not only meeting a technical necessity; you are also taking a step toward developing trust in a world that is driven by data.

     

    Benefits of Cloud Computing in Higher Education Institutions

     

     

    How to Choose the Right Cloud Provider for Universities? 7 Factors You Can’t Ignore

     

    7-golden-rules-for-picking-the-prefect-cloud-partner

     

    1. Solutions Tailored for Higher Education

    As said earlier, data privacy and compliance in educational cloud solutions is no longer an option but a necessity. Hence, as a first step, verify that your cloud partner provides solutions that are 100 % tailored to higher education institutions. A standard cloud provider may need to adequately meet the specific requirements of academic settings. Solutions created expressly for higher education to understand the complexity of student information systems, academic administration, and compliance regulations, which help avoid inefficiencies and missed opportunities.

     

    2. Several Deployment choices

    To maintain data privacy and compliance in educational cloud solutions, the next important thing to consider is to be open to several deployment choices. Flexibility depends on the capacity to choose among several deployment choices. A cloud partner should provide SaaS deployment methods, and hybrid, managed, and cloud-based solutions so your university may move on its terms. This flexibility guarantees that you can pick the right deployment method that is most suited for you, for your long-term and present requirements of your university.

     

    3. Proven History of Smooth Migrations

    It can be hard to move to the cloud, so it’s important to work with a partner who has a history of getting cloud transfers done on time and on budget. Before working with educational institutions, a reliable vendor should have shown that they can handle large-scale migrations with little trouble and no loss of data protection for educational institutions.

     

    4. Expertise in Security and Compliance

    Cybersecurity is a significant issue for higher education organizations managing sensitive information. Your cloud partner must implement stringent security protocols, with tight-kint encryption, multi-factor authentication, and routine security assessments. Furthermore, verify their adherence to industry standards and regulations, including GDPR and FERPA, to safeguard your institution’s data and uphold legal compliance.

     

    5. Scalability and Flexibility for Growth

    Higher education institutions are continually developing. Your cloud partner must provide scalable solutions that can adapt to your institution’s requirements. Your cloud infrastructure must possess the flexibility to scale up or down seamlessly in response to increased student enrollment, new academic programs, or expanded research efforts, without significant disruptions.

     

    6. Continuous Assistance and Enhancement

    Considering data privacy and compliance in educational cloud solutions, selecting a cloud partner that offers ongoing assistance after the initial deployment is a must. Continuous advisory services, system enhancements, and routine performance evaluations are a strict must-have. Note that an effective partner actively optimizes processes and identifies areas for improvement.

     

    7. Dedication to Research and Innovation

    Your cloud partner ought to be dedicated to ongoing innovation and development. Seek for suppliers who actively support research and development to improve their products depending on client comments. Constant evolution of a partner will allow your university stay at the forefront of educational technology and enable it to move with the times and meet new problems.

     

    Winding Thoughts Creatrix Campus Advantage

    With over a decade of experience, Creatrix Campus provides customized cloud solutions to higher education. We are built with data privacy and compliance in educational cloud solutions. You can streamline operations, improve the student experience, and future-proof your technical infrastructure with our focus on security + scalability + educational institution needs. For continuous support or flexible deployment, Creatrix Campus will help your institution succeed in the cloud!

    Ready to transform your institution’s cloud journey? Please contact us today.

    Source link

  • Collaboration is key when it comes to addressing harassment and sexual misconduct

    Collaboration is key when it comes to addressing harassment and sexual misconduct

    In all of the noise about the OfS’s new regulation on harassment and sexual misconduct there’s one area where the silence is notable and disappointing – sector collaboration.

    Back in 2022, the independent evaluation of the OfS statement of expectations on harassment and sexual misconduct made a clear recommendation that OfS and DfE “foster more effective partnership working“ both between HE providers and with those external to the sector. Now, having published details of the new condition E6 and the accompanying guidance, this seems to have been largely forgotten.

    There’s a nod to the potential benefit of collaboration in OfS’s analysis of consultation responses, but it only goes as far as to say that providers “may wish to identify collective steps” – with little explanation of what this could look like and no intention or commitment to proactively support this.

    This feels like a significant oversight, and one that is disappointing to say the least. It’s become clear from our work with IHE members that collaboration needs to be front and centre if we have any hope as a sector of delivering in this area. Without it, some providers – especially smaller ones – will not be able to meet the new requirements, creating risk and failing to achieve the consistency of practice and experience that students expect. This feels even more true given the current context of widespread financial insecurity. Any new regulation ought to be presenting mechanisms and incentives to collaborate – and reduce costs in doing so.

    Working together for a stronger sector – or only sometimes?

    The silence around collaboration is also surprising, given that in other spheres it is seen to be – and in many cases is – the solution to institutions meeting regulatory requirements and student expectations. John Blake’s latest speech on a regional approach to access and participation is just one example of this. There is implicit recognition that in this era of “diminishing resources”, working together is the solution. There’s also the recognition that partnership working needs funding – more on that later.

    It’s also surprising given that OfS has made clear that both providers in any academic partnership are responsible for compliance with the new condition, including where there’s a franchise arrangement. This seems like an open door for collaborative approaches, given that over half the providers on the register do not have their own degree awarding powers. However, as usual, it is unclear what this means in practice. There is no reference in the regulation to how the OfS would view any collaborative efforts, or examples of what this might look like in practice.

    Academic partnerships make logical collaborators

    IHE’s recent project on academic partnerships demonstrates the potential of such arrangements for collaboration that benefits both providers and their students. Our research found a number of innovative models where awarding institutions facilitated collaboration with and between their academic partners in areas including shared learning opportunities and use of shared platforms.

    There’s a clear opportunity here when it comes to staff training. All institutions need to have staff who are “appropriately trained”. Training in areas such as receiving disclosures and conducting investigations benefits from group delivery – where staff can learn from each other. A small provider might only have one or two staff who require it, meaning they are unlikely to draw much benefit from this. It would also make such training prohibitively expensive. It’s likely to need to be delivered by an external organisation (to ensure the “credible and demonstrable expertise” required) and such solutions aren’t scaled to an institution with just a handful of relevant staff. Awarding institutions sharing such group training would solve this – and also benefit shared processes in that staff across both institutions have the same level of knowledge and competence.

    A further benefit of shared training would be that partners could share staff when investigations need greater independence than a small provider can offer. This could be staff from the awarding partner, or another academic partner. This would effectively bring together useful knowledge of institutional context, policies and processes with the necessary external objectivity to run a credible investigation.

    Another opportunity for collaboration is in shared online reporting tools. These can be an effective way of encouraging disclosure, but such systems are often not scaled for small institutions. As well as being more cost-effective, sharing these could lead to greater confidence of students reporting in the independence of tool and the process that follows.

    Think local – for everyone’s sake!

    Regional or local collaboration is the other area with the potential to benefit students, providers, and other services supporting those who experience harassment or sexual misconduct.

    Local or regional collaboration on reporting and investigation can support disclosure by creating more independence in the system. The independent evaluation spoke specifically of this, recommending the facilitation of

    formal or informal shared services, such as regional support networks, and in particular regional investigation units or hubs.

    And it would enable more effective partnerships with external support services. Rather than every provider trying to establish a partnership with a local service (putting a greater burden on groups who are often charities or not-for-profits), group collaborations could streamline this. This needs to include all types of provider, including small providers and FE colleges delivering HE. This would be more efficient, reduce unhelpful competition for the limited resource of the service, and ensure that all students have access to these support services irrespective of their place of study.

    Where there aren’t local services, providers could pool resource and expertise to develop and deliver these. This would reduce competition for specialist staff in the same geographic location, and again ensure parity of support for students across providers.

    It’s important that such collaborations involve all parts of the sector, including small providers – with the burden of their participation reflective of their smaller size. This is vital to ensure that collaborative models are cost effective for everyone.

    Getting it right on student engagement

    Collaborative approaches are also going to be critical to make sure we get it right on student engagement. The OfS expectation is clear that providers work with students and their representatives to develop policies and procedures. But what happens when an institution doesn’t have an SU, or a formal representative structure, or the necessary experience in student engagement to do this? There’s a risk that it won’t be done properly or be done at all.

    We need to consider how we facilitate students to support each other to engage in co-production. This could include sharing staff or exploring the development of local student union services that bring in smaller providers or FE colleges without the means to partner with students in the way that is needed.

    Making it happen

    The sort of collaboration outlined above will need more than just the goodwill of institutions to make it happen. It needs regulatory backing, with more explicit recognition of the value of these approaches and guidance on what this might look like in practice. We also need to recognise that it’s costly.

    Catalyst funding, like that provided back in 2019, would represent far better value to the sector than asking individual providers to fund collaboration. The risk is that without it, the burden of developing a system that works for all students at all providers will be left to the smallest institutions who need these collaborative options the most. Funding would also boost evaluation and resource sharing across the sector. It could consider the benefits of collaborative approaches between awarding and teaching institutions as well as regional structures which ensure a greater parity of support across providers large and small.

    Somewhere on this path to regulation we lost the perspective that harassment and sexual misconduct is a societal issue. What we do now to educate, prevent harm to and support students will have a lasting impact on the future as students become employees, employers, parents and educators themselves. It is not a task to be shouldered alone.

    Source link

  • The Key Aspects to Keeping Children Safe Online

    The Key Aspects to Keeping Children Safe Online

    In today’s digital age, ensuring student safety online is a top priority for both parents and schools. Technology has opened new doors for enhancing student learning and engagement, but it also requires thoughtful strategies to ensure students remain safe.

    As schools embrace these technological advancements, both parents and administrators must work together to implement safety measures and address the evolving responsibilities that come with digital education. Experts from the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) share their insights on how to navigate these opportunities effectively while keeping students safe.

    Evolving safety protocols

    Cathy Leavitt, an instructional technologist and AECT member, explains that schools have increasingly adopted tools to safeguard students on digital platforms. “There are great apps and software that record what children are doing on devices,” Leavitt notes, emphasizing the importance of tools that monitor and restrict access to harmful content. However, technology alone isn’t enough. Leavitt stresses that digital literacy is vital to fostering a safe online environment, teaching students how to navigate the digital world responsibly.

    The importance of digital literacy

    Bruce DuBoff, Ph.D., past president of the NJ Association of School Librarians and nominated Ethics Officer for AECT, identifies a gap between today’s digital skills and the safety practices needed in schools. “We live in a world rocked by Future Shock,” DuBoff says, which describes the rapid technological advancements that have outpaced current educational approaches. He advocates for early education in ethical online behavior, with librarians playing a pivotal role in integrating technologies like podcasting, game design, and web development, which not only enhance learning but also ensure safe online engagement.

    Dr. DuBoff argues that the biggest threat isn’t Artificial Intelligence (AI) but the social media algorithms that create information silos, limiting students’ exposure to diverse viewpoints. By educating students on the risks of these algorithms and promoting digital literacy programs like Common Sense Education’s Digital Citizenship curriculum, schools can better equip students to navigate the online world safely.

    The role of parents

    Parental involvement is essential in maintaining online safety. Leavitt advocates for parents to monitor their children’s digital activities, even if it might feel like an invasion of privacy. She calls for a “unified approach” between schools and parents, with regular communication to ensure parents understand the risks their children face online. Schools play a crucial role by educating parents as much as students and providing ongoing resources to reinforce safe practices at home.

    Cybersecurity and administrative challenges

    As schools adopt more digital learning platforms, cybersecurity threats such as data breaches and cyberattacks have escalated. Leavitt points out that strong security measures such as two-factor authentication and regular updates are critical to safeguarding student data. However, these measures introduce additional challenges for school administrators, who must balance tight budgets and manage the growing costs of technology maintenance and staff training. Schools need to allocate resources strategically, ensuring that cybersecurity is prioritized without unnecessary overspending.

    Moving forward

    Keeping students safe in the digital world increasingly requires collaboration and a unified approach between parents, teachers, and administrators at schools. Open communication between all three groups from a common framework of understanding provided in comprehensive digital literacy programs combined with strong cybersecurity measures are essential to creating safer online environments for our loved ones while managing the administrative challenges that come with these advancements.

    Source link

  • Prioritizing Mental Health Support in Community Colleges: Key Data from 2023

    Prioritizing Mental Health Support in Community Colleges: Key Data from 2023

    Title: Supporting Minds, Supporting Learners: Addressing Student Mental Health to Advance Academic Success

    Source: Center for Community College Student Engagement

    The 2023 Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) and Survey of Entering Student Engagement (SENSE) gathered essential data to guide community colleges in supporting student mental health and well-being. The surveys collected responses from 61,085 students at 149 community colleges in spring 2023 and 13,950 students at 61 community colleges in fall 2023, respectively.

    Key findings include:

    • Mental health concerns are prevalent among CCSSE and SENSE respondents. In the two weeks before taking the survey, half of CCSSE students and 47 percent of SENSE students reported feeling down, depressed, or hopeless for at least several days. Additionally, 66 percent of students in both groups felt nervous, anxious, or on edge for at least several days.
    • Approximately 26 percent of CCSSE respondents and 23 percent of SENSE respondents likely have a depressive disorder. Over half (53 percent) of students who identify with a gender identity other than man or woman have a probable depressive disorder, compared with 28 percent of women and 25 percent of men. Traditional college-age students (31 percent) and those with a GPA of C or lower (39 percent) are more likely to have a depressive disorder, compared with 19 percent of nontraditional-age students and 23 percent of students with a GPA of B or higher.
    • Overall, 32 percent of CCSSE respondents and 29 percent of SENSE respondents likely have generalized anxiety disorder. Among CCSSE students, 62 percent of those identifying with another gender likely have an anxiety disorder, in contrast to 36 percent of female and 25 percent of male students. Students identifying with two or more races saw the highest levels of generalized anxiety disorder, at 36 percent. Among SENSE respondents, traditional-age students were more likely to have generalized anxiety disorder, at 30 percent, compared to 23 percent of nontraditional-age students.
    • Over half of CCSSE respondents (56 percent) reported that emotional or mental health challenges affected their academic performance in the previous four weeks. 30 percent noted these issues impacted their performance for three or more days. Nearly two-thirds of women (63 percent) and almost half of men (47 percent) reported performance declines due to mental health issues, while 85 percent of students identifying with another gender faced academic impacts. Lower GPA students were more likely to report that mental health issues affected their academic performance.
    • Students with likely generalized anxiety disorder are twice as likely, and those with a depressive disorder are almost twice as likely, to report academic performance declines due to emotional or mental difficulties compared to students likely without these disorders.
    • 63 percent of students identifying with another gender reported that mental health challenges could lead them to withdraw from classes, compared to 39 percent of women and 29 percent of men. More than half of students with a GPA of C or lower (53 percent) stated they were at least somewhat likely to consider withdrawal due to mental health concerns, in contrast to 33 percent of students with a GPA of B or higher.
    • High percentages of students felt their college prioritizes mental health, yet about three in 10 CCSSE respondents and slightly more SENSE respondents said they wouldn’t know where to seek help if needed. Hispanic or Latino students were most likely among racial/ethnic groups to report not knowing where to turn for mental health support.
    • Over one-third of students with likely depressive or generalized anxiety disorders reported not knowing where to find professional mental health assistance if needed. Among CCSSE respondents who needed mental health support in the past year, 42 percent never sought help, with Hispanic or Latino students and men more likely than other groups to indicate they hadn’t pursued support. Approximately one-third of students with probable depressive or generalized anxiety disorders reported never seeking help.Many students cited limited resources as the main barrier to seeking mental health support. Students, especially traditional-age students and men, also frequently mentioned concerns about others’ perceptions and uncertainty about what kind of help they need.
    • Across all groups, students expressed a strong preference for in-person individual counseling or therapy over teletherapy and other support options.
    • Only 16 percent of CCSSE respondents considered it essential that their mental health provider understands their cultural background. However, students with another gender identity and Black or African American students were more likely to value culturally informed mental health support.

    Check out the full report on the CCSSE website.

    —Nguyen DH Nguyen

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

    Source link

  • Three Key Takeaways from P3 EDU 2024

    Three Key Takeaways from P3 EDU 2024

    Three Key Takeaways from P3 EDU 2024

    I love the Fall for a number of reasons, one of which is the vast number of conferences and events within the higher ed and education technology space. I’m continually impressed and inspired by the intelligence and expertise of the leaders and tacticians within our industry. When you bring together smart people to share insights and learns, discuss ways to navigate challenges and evolving market paradigms, and work together to uncover new growth opportunities, great things start to happen. You can see pathways to transformation and how you can make a positive impact. It’s both refreshing and inspiring.

    I recently had the opportunity to attend and speak at the P3 EDU conference. All the panels were insightful and topical, and the panelists paired their expertise with strong points of view about where higher education is headed. It was a powerful reminder that we must adapt to a rapidly changing landscape, embrace innovation, and prioritize student success.

    As we all know, the higher education space is facing significant challenges. We’re navigating demographic shifts and cliffs, a relentless focus on affordability and outcomes, and the ever-present need to adapt — and adapt quickly. While the pressures can feel overwhelming, the P3 conference reminded us that we don’t have to go it alone. It also reinforced that Collegis Education is not only focusing our time and effort on the right things but leading the way in many areas.

    Here are the key themes that resonated with me and what I walked away with.

    1. Data-Driven Decisions: The New Normal

    There was an undeniable consensus around the power of data and its role in helping schools evolve. Institutions have become acutely aware of where they have or lack data proficiency and how data is used or misused across the organization. Schools now understand the role that strategic partnerships can play in eliminating data deficiency and unlocking data potential.

    This is what we at Collegis call being data enabled. Being data-driven has become table stakes –– but being data-enabled is a step above. Enabled data is achieved by eliminating tech and data siloes and elevating your data integrity and thoroughness. Once that is done, it open up new data enabled capabilities to drive impact across the entire student lifecycle.

    But to maximize your ability to drive meaningful growth, retention, and outcomes, you must first unlock the potential within your systems and the underlying data.

    2. AI: A Double-Edged Sword

    If your inbox or LinkedIn feed looks like mine, it’s hard not to come across some AI-related article, product, or debate. It’s no surprise AI in higher ed was a hot topic at the conference. While some view it as a threat, I believe AI offers higher ed immense opportunities and can be transformational.

    But to take advantage of AI, you must get your data house in order. If you start to power your AI tools with spotty data, you’ll get lackluster outcomes, poor ROI, and a lot of frustration along the way.

    At Collegis, we’re using AI to drive effectiveness across the student lifecycle. We’re helping schools leverage automation to make administrative tasks less cumbersome, creating capacity and allowing limited human capital to focus on where they can make the most impact. But AI’s impact goes beyond automation. We’re also helping our schools harness its power to enable predictive analytics, using AI to analyze large data sets. Now, our partners can begin to deploy proactive strategies rather than reactionary ones, helping them to anticipate student needs, identify points of failure before they occur, and refine their programmatic offerings to keep pace with workforce demands. We must continue to innovate, leveraging new AI advancements, for the sake of our partner institutions.

    3. The Power of Partnership: The Expanding Landscape of P3s

    At the conference, there was a clear sense that P3s (public-private partnerships) are expanding beyond their traditional scope. More schools are welcoming partnerships to address complex challenges like the enrollment cliff and seizing emerging opportunities in technology, campus development, research collaboration, student housing, and infrastructure. Our industry needs to become less risk-averse, and we need to push ourselves to lead the way rather than chase the trends or replicate the innovators in our space who have found success by challenging the status quo.

    The disruptions we face indicate a wider shift in the educational landscape. By embracing partnerships, leveraging data and technology, and preparing our students for the future, we can emerge stronger and more innovative than ever before.

    You have to ask yourself, “How well am I, my institution, and the companies I partner with positioned to succeed in this disruptive market?”

    — Kim Fahey, CEO Collegis Education

    Source link

  • Key Findings from the 2025 Landscape of Higher Education Report  

    Key Findings from the 2025 Landscape of Higher Education Report  

    As higher education navigates demographic shifts, new technologies, and economic challenges, institutions face a complex landscape when optimizing enrollment and meeting the evolving needs of students. The 2025 Landscape of Higher Education Report provides actionable insights that empower educational leaders to improve learning pathways and better serve the Modern Learner.

    Challenges such as the rising education costs have led to increased scrutiny of a college degree’s value, with only 47% of Americans considering it worthwhile without loans. When loans are involved, this number drops to 22%, underscoring the imperative for institutions to adapt to more cost-effective pathways.

    The 2025 Report offers a future-oriented outlook, equipping institutions with data to address gaps and better understand the evolving profile of the Modern Learner. Themes include shifting student preferences, an increased emphasis on career-aligned programs, and the need for more flexible learning pathways. In this article, explore six key findings that are molding students’ educational journeys and how these trends can enable education leaders to adapt.

    Finding #1: Flexible Pathways Drive Enrollment Growth 

    Spring 2024 saw a 2.5% increase in undergraduate enrollment, particularly within community colleges, public institutions, and associate degree-granting baccalaureate institutions (PABs). Graduate programs also saw enrollment increases, with a 3% rise. The highest areas of growth occurred among private, for-profit four-year institutions. These trends indicate a growing demand for flexible learning pathways that accommodate different student preferences and career aspirations.

    The age profile of part-time students has shifted as well, with the median age of part-time undergraduate students decreasing by nearly 2% across all sectors since Spring 2020. The shift was most pronounced at public two-year institutions, which saw a 4.2% decrease, and private accredited bachelor’s programs, which experienced a 2.8% decrease. As the age of part-time students continues to trend younger, it reaffirms that age is no longer a reliable predictor of learning modality. Furthermore, these shifting demographics emphasize the importance of embracing a Unified Enrollment Strategy that engages with Modern Learners based on their preferences and behaviors to meet them where they are with the right message, in the right place at the right time.

    Finding #2: Modern Learners are Prioritizing Practical Skills and Career Outcomes

    The emphasis on practical skills and career-readiness is reshaping Modern Learners’ educational preferences. With nearly half of Americans questioning the value of a traditional college degree, the demand for flexible, affordable, and industry-aligned options is growing rapidly. Apprenticeships have emerged as an appealing pathway for Modern Learners, offering paid opportunities for hands-on learning and gaining practical skills without the burden of taking on additional debt. 

    Over the past decade, the number of apprenticeships in the U.S. has more than doubled, from approximately 317,000 to 640,000. Sectors such as Construction and Public Administration have led this growth with 34.5% and 22.4% increases, respectively. High-growth fields like Healthcare, Finance, and Technical Services present additional opportunities for expanding apprenticeship programs, aligning well with workforce demands and students’ increasing preference for practical, job-ready experience.  

    Despite apprenticeships’ increasing appeal, accessibility poses a challenge. While 75% find apprenticeships appealing, only 29% find them accessible. Geographic location, program availability, and a lack of awareness remain barriers that can prevent students from participating. Institutions can remove these barriers through strategic partnerships with industry leaders to expand opportunities, integrate practical skill-building in program curriculums, and market available programs to raise awareness. These efforts not only meet the demands of Modern Learners by providing them with relevant skills, but also enable employers to recruit qualified candidates, making apprenticeships valuable for both higher education and the economy.

    Finding #3: Student Demand for Alternative Credentials Continues to Rise 

    Much like apprenticeships, the rising demand for alternative credentials like certificates further underscores the shifting preference towards more flexible and affordable learning pathways. As students continue to seek programs that offer practical skills and immediate benefits for their careers, certificates have increasingly become an attractive alternative to traditional degree paths. With the cost of higher education on the rise, Modern Learners are turning to certificate programs as a focused and affordable way to gain relevant skills for their desired career industries.

    Spring 2024 saw significant growth in certificate enrollments, with graduate programs seeing a nearly 10% increase and undergraduate certificates growing by nearly 4%. This growth reinforces that Modern Learners are increasingly prioritizing education opportunities that yield a high return-on-investment. Institutions can capitalize on this interest by expanding certificate offerings and making them more accessible to students through diverse modalities, competitive pricing, and aligning programs with job demands.  

    Finding #4: Dual Enrollment Programs Gain Momentum Among High School Students

    Dual Enrollment programs are becoming increasingly popular pathways, as more young learners seek flexible avenues for higher education. The popularity of these programs aligns with the growing trend of younger students engaging in part-time studies, demonstrating a trend towards more adaptable educational modalities. Dual enrollment has increased over 10% over the last year alone, adding approximately 100,000 students and accounting for nearly 28.1% of undergraduate enrollment increases. This growth presents a crucial opportunity for institutions to leverage this interest as they develop enrollment strategies going into 2025.

    Finding #5: The Some College, No Credential (SCNC) Population Presents a Growing Opportunity for Re-Engagement

    The Some College, No Credential (SCNC) population, now at 36.8 million and growing by 2.9% from the previous year, represents a significant opportunity for enrollment growth. With re-enrollment rising by 9.1% in the 2022-2023 academic year, institutions have a chance to attract students who left before completing their degrees.

    Understanding the educational preferences of SCNC students is key to tailoring outreach and support services. Popular fields of study for this group include Business and Liberal Arts at the bachelor’s level, Liberal Arts and General Studies for associate degrees, and Health professions and Business for undergraduate certificates. These areas indicate a clear demand for programs that offer clear pathways to employment. To effectively engage this population, institutions should focus on building accessible options that allow students to build upon previously earned credits, prioritize transfer credits, and offer support that enables students to advance in their chosen career fields.

    Finding #6: International Student Enrollment Boosts Institutions’ Global Appeal

    The growing population of international students enrolled at U.S. schools presents a valuable opportunity to enhance universities’ presence and grow enrollments.  These students comprise of a significant share of enrollments, particularly in Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York, and California, where they account for 4.5% to 7.8% of the student population. Most undergraduate international students are enrolled within the public sector, underscoring its position to support higher education on a domestic and international scale.

    To maximize the benefits of international student enrollment, institutions should focus on strategies that attract and retain international students while providing support services tailored to their unique needs. By integrating a comprehensive enrollment and student support system with resources like language assistance, housing support, and financial aid, institutions can boost their global appeal, create more culturally diverse campuses, and enhance their enrollment by positioning themselves as a top choice for students worldwide.

    Looking Toward 2025

    The findings from the 2025 Landscape of Higher Education Report demonstrate both the challenges and opportunities shaping the future of higher education.

    As institutions look ahead, the ability to attract and retain students across a range of educational paths requires a holistic approach to enrollment and student support services. By focusing on creating accessible, cost-effective, and relevant learning opportunities, institutions can position themselves for success in 2025 and beyond, while meeting the diverse needs of Modern Learners and driving sustainable enrollment growth.

    For more insights and actionable strategies, download the full 2025 Landscape of Higher Education Report and see how your institution can stay ahead of the curve.

    Source link

  • 10 Key Benefits of Using Fee Management Software in Higher Education

    10 Key Benefits of Using Fee Management Software in Higher Education

    Tune In To Our Audio Blog

     

    Higher Education institutions are increasingly moving towards an automated age of cloud, mobile, and big data analytics. There are many reasons institutions should implement the strategy of collecting payments through cloud and mobile-based fee management software. It would be desirable for any type of institution to automate billing/fee collection and drive greater revenue while saving greater hours of manual work.

    A fee management software solves many problems for higher education and helps parents to keep track of fee payments in real-time. No more manual records or calculations on sheets of paper. Using the fee accounting and financial management software, students and parents can use the latest technology tools to connect various departments such as admission, finance, transport, hostel, library, and more. This will result in wider engagement and improved efficiency in educational institutions with the synchronization of data on fee collections. Student fee collection and unpaid fee details can be accessed on mobile devices including iPhone and Android from anywhere and anytime, beyond the campus.

     

    Key Benefits of Using Fee Management Software

     

     

    Effortless Payment Integration

    Fee management software integrates effortlessly with most of the common payment gateway platforms, allowing students to select the payment options that best suit them, including digital wallets, bank transfers, and credit/debit cards, and pay in a click. To those in the finance team, the software ensures safe cash flow, timely payments, and streamlined financial operations, without spending too much time.

     

    Financial Data at the Fingertips

    Real-time financial insights can be obtained through the use of dynamic reporting technologies and real-time analytics of the finance module. Your team including key decision-makers and institutional heads can now make precise, data-driven decisions with this state-of-the-art capability, which guarantees precise financial forecasting and institutional strategic planning that helps you deal with tomorrow.

     

    100% Security on Finances

    Improve your institution’s financial security with cutting-edge encryption and AI-driven threat detection that most fee management software comes with. By using the most recent cybersecurity technologies integrated into the fee management systems, you can almost eliminate the risk of data breaches and fraud, providing rock-solid safety and total peace of mind for both the higher ed’s institution and its students.

     

    Personalized Payment Plans

    Transform student financial management with fully customizable payment alternatives that meet individual students’ needs. Whether it’s flexible installment plans, financial aid, or delayed payments, these specialized fee solutions increase student satisfaction and retention by giving the financial flexibility, empowerment, and assistance that every student deserves. The Mobile-first approach is another attractive feature of the fee management software that makes it a totally attractive package. 

     

    Laborsaving Fee Reconciliation

    Turbocharge your financial process with intelligent automation that promptly and accurately aligns invoices and payments, slashing administrative burdens and decreasing human errors so that employees can concentrate on key responsibilities.

     

    Mobile Access

    In a world where mobile devices are becoming more and more common, redefine payment management with a strong mobile platform that enables administrators and students to accept payments whenever and wherever they choose.

     

    Personalized Fee Structures

    Your higher education can execute a bunch of unique financial models and individualized solutions by utilizing flexible fee structures that are made to meet the unique requirements of different programs, courses, and students.

     

    Effortless Refund Automation

    Instill confidence in students with a cutting-edge, automated refund system that ensures rapid and precise disbursements, in no time. This benefit indeed reflects your institution’s dedication to transparency and superior financial stewardship.

     

    Seamless Regulatory Navigation

    Using state-of-the-art compliance tools, institutions can easily adhere to local and international financial regulations, protecting your institution from fines and legal trouble while maintaining the greatest levels of honesty and integrity.

     

    Strategic Financial Planning

    Make the most of cutting-edge analytics and comprehensive reporting to find insightful financial data, improve the distribution of resources, and create plans for strategic expansion that will help your higher education institution grow and prosper.

     

    Revolutionize Your Finances with Creatrix Fee Management Software Today

    In summary, putting in place strong fee management software is not just a contemporary comfort but also a tactical requirement for higher education institutions. Operational efficiency, financial correctness, and student satisfaction can all be significantly increased by integrating automated procedures, real-time financial information, and customized payment plans too!

    A recent research demonstrated the transformative power of such technology by showing that institutions that implemented advanced fee management systems witnessed a 75% reduction in administrative workload and a 30% rise in timely payments.

    If you wish to be one such institution, Creatrix Campus can help. Find out how the Creatrix Campus Fee Management System can improve security, expedite your billing procedures, and give you the real-time data you require to spur productivity and growth. To find out more and arrange a demo right away, click this link!

    Source link

  • Bridging 2023 and 2024: Key U.S. Immigration Updates From December – CUPA-HR

    Bridging 2023 and 2024: Key U.S. Immigration Updates From December – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | January 11, 2024

    December was a busy month for immigration-related developments, with several important updates that have implications for the higher education sector. In this post, we provide highlights of the actions that took place last month.

    CUPA-HR Joins Comments to DHS on H-1B Modernization NPRM

    On December 22, 2023, CUPA-HR and 19 other higher education associations joined comments led by the American Council on Education (ACE) in response to the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) H-1B Modernization Proposal. Additionally, CUPA-HR joined 73 organizations from the higher education, state and local economic development, business, science, and policy sectors to submit a comment in response to the H-1B Notice of Proposed Rulemaking’s (NPRM) proposed definition for specialty occupations.

    The ACE-led letter expresses support for several of the proposed changes. These include the change to a beneficiary-centric lottery system, codifying DHS policy of deference to prior adjudications of Form I-129 petitions, clarifying the term “normally” in specialty occupation criteria, and implementing an automatic extension for CAP-GAP. (CAP-GAP is the time between the official end-date of an F-1 student visa and the start date of the H-1B visa). However, the letter also expresses concerns about proposed changes to the definition of a “specialty occupation” and “specific specialty requirement” in the H-1B visa program. The concerns highlight the potential limitation on the ability to attract diverse candidates for faculty positions and the narrowing pipeline for growth in high-technology fields, which could deter foreign students and hinder research and innovation in the United States. The letter calls for a reconsideration of these proposed changes to ensure that H-1B visa regulations align with the evolving dynamics of professional education and the modern workforce.

    In the multi-sector comment letter, CUPA-HR joined voices to address concerns over the H-1B NPRM’s proposed redefinition of “specialty occupations.” This diverse coalition raised issues about the potential negative impacts of these changes on interdisciplinary hiring, particularly in emerging science and technology fields. They argued that the new requirements, like the need for a degree to be “directly related” to job duties, could limit U.S. competitiveness in global innovation and create challenges for employers.

    Now that the comment period has concluded, the DHS will begin the process of reviewing the feedback received. As the department moves toward finalizing the proposals within this rulemaking, they may issue one or more final rules, depending on the availability of agency resources. CUPA-HR will continue to closely monitor these developments and keep its members informed of all significant updates and outcomes.

    State Department Announces Extension and Expansion of the Nonimmigrant Visa Interview Waiver Program

    On December 21, 2023, the Department of State (DOS) determined that, in consultation with DHS, certain categories of interview waivers are in the national interest. As a result, consular officers will continue to have the authority and discretion to waive an in-person interview for certain categories of nonimmigrant visa cases, with some changes made by DOS.

    This update includes the following key changes.

    • First-time H-2 Visa Applicants: Temporary agricultural and non-agricultural workers applying for H-2 visas are now eligible for an interview waiver.
    • Extended Eligibility for Other Visa Applicants: The waiver also applies to applicants for any nonimmigrant visa classification who have previously been issued a visa other than a B visa and are reapplying within 48 months of their last visa’s expiration.
    • Renewal Policy Unchanged: Applicants renewing their nonimmigrant visa in the same classification within 48 months of the prior visa’s expiration date continue to be eligible for the interview waiver.

    The department’s previous interview waiver eligibility criteria were set to expire on December 31, 2023. Not only has the program been extended as of January 1, but it now also includes more nonimmigrant categories. Notably, the current guidance is intended to remain in place indefinitely, as no expiration date has been specified.

    DOL Issues Request for Information on PERM Schedule A Revisions

    On December 21, 2023, in alignment with President Biden’s Executive Order 14110 on Artificial Intelligence, the Department of Labor’s (DOL) Employment and Training Administration (ETA) issued a Request for Information (RFI) that aims to gather public feedback on potential updates to Schedule A job classifications that exempt certain roles from the standard labor certification requirements. Specifically, the DOL is exploring the inclusion of AI, other STEM-related occupations, and additional fields where there is a notable shortage of qualified U.S. workers.

    According to the Immigration and Nationality Act’s labor certification provisions, employers are obligated to demonstrate that there are insufficient U.S. workers available and that hiring foreign nationals will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similar U.S. roles. This process is managed through the Program Electronic Review Management (PERM) system by the ETA. Employers seeking labor certification for prospective permanent immigrant workers must navigate a complex and time-consuming process, often extending the immigration timeline.

    Schedule A, established by the DOL in the mid-1960s, pre-certifies occupations experiencing national labor shortages, thereby waiving the labor certification requirement for these roles. Currently, Schedule A is divided into two groups: Group I comprises physical therapists and professional nurses, and Group II includes occupations that require exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or performing arts. With this RFI, the DOL aims to critically examine and potentially broaden Schedule A’s scope, a move that could accelerate the hiring of essential foreign talent by aligning with evolving labor market demands and streamlining the employment authorization process.

    Key areas where the department seeks input include the following.

    1. Identifying Labor Shortages in STEM: The department invites suggestions on the most appropriate data sources and methods to ascertain whether there are labor shortages in STEM occupations. They are interested in understanding if Schedule A should be utilized to mitigate these shortages and how to develop a reliable, objective, and transparent method to identify STEM occupations facing labor shortages.
    2. Scope of STEM Occupations: There’s a need for input on whether the examination of STEM occupations should be limited to those outlined in the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics and recent Bureau of Labor Statistics publications, or whether it should be broadened to include additional occupations, particularly those covering Skilled Technical Work occupations.
    3. Inclusion of Non-STEM Occupations: The department is also open to suggestions on whether non-STEM occupations facing worker shortages should be added to Schedule A. Input is sought on how to determine such shortages and ensure that the employment of foreign workers in these roles does not negatively impact U.S. workers.

    Comments in response to the RFI are due on February 20, 2024.

    U.S. Department of State Announces Pilot Program for Domestic Renewal of H-1B Visas

    On December 21, 2023, DOS announced a pilot program to resume domestic visa renewal for H-1B nonimmigrant visa applicants who meet certain requirements. It offers eligible H-1B visa holders the chance to renew their visas within the U.S., bypassing the need for an in-person interview at a consulate or embassy. DOS will start accepting online applications for the H-1B visa renewal pilot program on January 29, 2024.

    Eligibility for the U.S. Department of State’s H-1B visa renewal pilot program is defined by a set of specific criteria:

    • Visa Classification and Issuance: The program is strictly for those looking to renew an H-1B visa. Eligible visas must have been issued by Mission Canada (from January 1, 2020, to April 1, 2023) or Mission India (from February 1, 2021, to September 30, 2021).
    • Fee and Interview Requirements: Applicants should not be subject to a nonimmigrant visa issuance fee, often referred to as a “reciprocity fee,” and must be eligible for a waiver of the in-person interview.
    • Biometric and Visa Status: Participants must have previously submitted ten fingerprints for a visa application, and their prior visa should not include a “clearance received” annotation. Additionally, they must not have any visa ineligibilities requiring a waiver.
    • Petition and Status Maintenance: It’s essential that applicants have an approved, unexpired H-1B petition, are currently maintaining H-1B status in the U.S., and their period of authorized admission in this status has not expired.
    • Travel and Reentry Intent: Applicants must have been last admitted to the U.S. in H-1B status and intend to reenter the U.S. in the same status after temporary travel abroad.

    Background and Objectives. The pilot is a response to the discontinuation of domestic non-diplomatic visa renewals in 2004 due to the requirement for biometric identifiers. With advancements in technology, the DOS is now looking to assess its capacity to handle domestic renewals and reduce global visa application backlogs. This pilot is particularly aimed at alleviating uncertainties for U.S. companies employing temporary H-1B workers.

    Application Process:

    • Application Portal: U.S. Visa Employment Domestic Renewal.
    • Slot Allocation: Approximately 4,000 slots will be available weekly, split between applicants with visas issued by Mission Canada and Mission India.
    • Application Dates: January 29, February 5, 12, 19, and 26. The portal will close temporarily once weekly caps are reached.
    • Application Window: The program will close on April 1, 2024, or when all slots are filled, whichever is earlier.

    Currently, the program excludes categories like H-4 visas. The DOS plans to extend the program to more visa types in the future, but for now, it’s limited to H-1B principal applicants meeting the specified criteria.



    Source link