Tag: News

  • How a Drop in Ph.D. Students Could Affect Colleges

    How a Drop in Ph.D. Students Could Affect Colleges

    Under mounting financial and political pressures, universities have paused or rescinded graduate student admissions on an unprecedented scale, which could create cross-campus ripple effects next fall and beyond.

    The extent of the cuts to the graduate student workforce remains unclear and will vary from institution to institution. But if and when those losses come to pass, experts say that employing fewer graduate students—particularly Ph.D. students, who typically hold years-long research and teaching assistantships—will undermine universities’ broader operations, including undergraduate education, faculty support and the future of academic research, which is reliant on training the next generation of scholars.

    “First and foremost, a reduction in the number of graduate students may threaten that individualized, close attention for undergraduates,” said Julia Kent, vice president of best practices and strategic initiatives at the Council of Graduate Schools.

    That’s because many doctoral students work as teaching assistants, particularly for large introductory undergraduate courses, where they assist with grading, lead discussion sections, help students with assignments and supervise labs.

    “While a professor may be doing the lectures for those courses, they may not seem as approachable or accessible to undergraduates. In those cases, the graduate teaching assistant is the first point of contact for that student. They may go to them for questions or feel more comfortable asking for help with assignment,” said Kent, who added that graduate students also support universities’ learning missions in other ways, too. “They may also help staff in the writing center and support undergraduates writing essays for their classes and provide informal mentoring.”

    ‘Not Sustainable’

    Although colleges and universities haven’t felt the effects of losing a number of those roles yet, Kent said the uncertainty surrounding graduate admissions poses a “real risk” to undergraduate learning.

    If universities do want to maintain smaller class sizes with fewer graduate students, they may rely even more heavily on low-paid contingent faculty, said Rosemary Perez, an associate professor at the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education at the University of Michigan.

    “That’s not sustainable for those instructors, who may be teaching five or six classes at multiple campuses and still not making enough to live,” she said. And with fewer graduate students in the pipeline, “we’ll also have fewer people who are trained to be faculty. People are going to retire. Who’s going to teach these college classes that have experience working with college students?”

    Nothing concrete has to happen for people weighing their futures to decide to take a different path where it seems like there may be more stability. Rational humans may decide that’s not the direction they want to go in anymore, and that’s going to be an immediate loss to the field.”

    —Marcel Agüeros, astronomy professor at Columbia University

    And with fewer spots available to prospective graduate students, Perez fears students who don’t attend top-ranked institutions will be the first to disappear from the academic pipeline. That’s because when resources are scarce, “the tendency is to rely on markers of prestige or GRE scores as predictors of success,” she said. “But those aren’t great predictors of what people are capable of doing in their careers.”

    Fewer graduate students will also likely mean a heavier workload for faculty, who in addition to teaching, also rely on them to help with research by assisting in running labs and research groups and co-authoring papers.

    “They help universities’ reputation, but they also help faculty funding prospects by making the faculty more productive, because funding agencies like to see productive faculty. A lot of that labor is happening through graduate students,” said Julie Posselt, a higher education professor at the University of Southern California, which last month revoked outstanding offers for numerous Ph.D. programs, including sociology, chemistry, sociology, molecular biology and religion. “Meanwhile, there’s also plenty of evidence that Ph.D. students are contributing to universities’ research output and are independently advancing knowledge in their respective fields.”

    Impact Will Reach All Fields

    Already, numerous universities across the country have said they’re reducing the number of Ph.D. students in the biomedical sciences as a result of drastic cuts to the National Institutes of Health, which each year sends universities billions of dollars in grants that indirectly and directly support graduate education.

    But it won’t just be those in the biomedical sciences that feel those cuts, especially as colleges downsize their budgets in light of the NIH’s plan to cap the amount of money it gives institutions for indirect research costs, which covers facilities maintenance, compliance with patient safety protocols and hazardous biowaste removal. Although a federal judge has blocked those cuts for now, the Department of Health and Human Services filed an appeal Monday; if the plan takes effect, it will force universities to find other areas they can cut from their budgets to make up the difference.

    “Even if you’re in the humanities, what’s happening right now in federal granting agencies that are far from the humanities has an impact on the humanities, because the overall budget for a university to do things like keep up their infrastructure and keep the lights on will go down,” said Jody Greene, associate campus provost and literature professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “And if we also don’t have international students, that’s also going to be a significant budget hit at institutions like ours.”

    International Students at Play

    In addition to drastic cuts in grant funding from the NIH, the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Department of Education, the government has also revoked scores of international graduate students’ visas and detained several others.

    U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has characterized, with little concrete evidence, those students as “lunatics” who came to the United States “not just to study but to participate in movements that vandalize universities, harass students, take over buildings and cause chaos.” The administration is also considering a travel ban affecting 43 countries. (After Trump issued a travel ban for seven countries during his first term, the number of international applicants to U.S. colleges fell 5.5 percent for graduate students, though applications have been on the rebound post-pandemic.)

    But universities worry that targeting international students—who made up nearly one in four incoming graduate students in 2022—will create a chilling effect, cause international student enrollment to plunge and strip institutions of yet another vital revenue source. According to data from the Institute of International Education, 81 percent of international undergraduate students and 61 percent of graduate students completely fund their own tuition.

    Would-Be Ph.D.s Wary

    All this politically driven chaos and financial uncertainty is making graduate school—and a career as a faculty member—a harder sell for students interested in research careers.

    “Up until this year, we’ve been able to tell prospective graduate students that the university will cover the costs of their Ph.D.,” said Marcel Agüeros, an astronomy professor at Columbia University, where the Trump administration has frozen some $650 million in NIH funding. “We want to stay true to that commitment, but we’d be lying if we said that’s going to be 100 percent possible.”

    And even though his department is currently only expecting to offer one fewer Ph.D. slot, Agüeros said the uncertainty over the future of federal funding—and even what areas of research academics are allowed to pursue—is enough to push people out of academia.

    “Nothing concrete has to happen for people weighing their futures to decide to take a different path where it seems like there may be more stability,” he said. “Rational humans may decide that’s not the direction they want to go in anymore, and that’s going to be an immediate loss to the field.”

    And those are the questions would-be graduate students all over the country are asking themselves right now.

    “We don’t have any data yet, but anecdotally, I’m hearing that there are a ton of students who are choosing not to even try to go to graduate school this year and next year because they’re perceiving less funding and support,” said Bethany Usher, immediate past president of the Council on Undergraduate Research and provost at Radford University in Virginia.

    “Those Ph.D. students are the ones who push the boundaries of research,” she added. “They have the newest ideas, and if we reduce those, it will have a generational impact on higher education, industries and communities.”

    Source link

  • Key Takeaways From Higher Ed Free Speech Conference

    Key Takeaways From Higher Ed Free Speech Conference

    The University of California National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement held its annual virtual #SpeechMatters conference Thursday amid a speech environment that is vastly different and far more fraught than anyone could have imagined even a few months ago. The Trump administration is simultaneously punishing colleges for their failure to clamp down on pro-Palestinian protesters and detaining international students, in some cases for participating in those same protests.

    In her opening remarks, Michelle Deutchman, the center’s executive director, acknowledged as much: “Today we gather at a critical moment for higher education across the nation,” she said. “The role of colleges and universities in our democracy is being questioned. Trust in institutions is shifting. The impact of a historic national election and a year of campus protests continues to unfold.”

    The conference, which featured four panels and 15 speakers with expertise in free speech and higher education, covered not only campus speech but also the broader questions of trust in universities and the knowledge they produce. Here are five key takeaways from the event.

    1. College administrators can’t prevent the chilling effect President Trump’s actions are having on campuses.

    In one session, Deutchman asked Howard Gillman, chancellor at the University of California, Irvine, for 12 years, and Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, how students can exercise their right to free speech despite the Trump administration’s crackdown on institutions and students alike for purported antisemitic speech.

    Gillman and Chemerinsky found a consensus—one that contradicts the widely held belief that universities should always be forums for political discussion: As long as Trump appears to be punishing individuals for constitutionally protected speech, now may not be the time to encourage students to speak out.

    “When you have an administration that has not yet been constrained by the courts sufficiently, it does create an environment where people might know they have, in theory, legal protections for the activities they engage in, but just because your activity may be protected doesn’t meant that you are not going to be put in a very complicated situation if the government does move forward,” Gillman said. “I don’t want to overstate the amount of reassurance that you can give. A chilling environment is a chilling environment.”

    Chemerinsky said it wasn’t tenable to assure students that he could protect them from the federal government. One student had asked him if the law school could prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers from coming onto campus and detaining students, and Chemerinsky said he had to tell the student that wouldn’t be possible. (In February, Trump rolled back protections that stopped immigration enforcement actions from taking place in certain locations, including on college campuses.)

    “There’s a limit to what we can do to protect students. I don’t want to ever have students have the illusion that we can do more than we can,” he said.

    1. Rebuilding trust in higher ed requires a fundamental shift in culture.

    When discussing the lack of trust in higher education, Steven Mintz, a history professor at the University of Texas at Austin and a columnist for Inside Higher Ed, said the distrust exists not just between the government and colleges, or administrators and faculty, but at all levels of higher education. Students erode trust with faculty when they don’t put effort into their courses, he said. Faculty who care more about their own research and success than their students and institutions likewise fail to build trust with their students and peers. And administrators earn the faculty’s distrust by leaving them out of key decision-making processes.

    It’s all a result of Americans’ shifting view of higher education from a public good to a private one, he argued, with students as the consumers and administrators as the CEOs.

    “It is absolutely imperative that we rebuild trust within our campuses,” he said. “It’s not a matter of policy tweaks; it’s a matter of a fundamental cultural shift.”

    He noted that in his own classes at UT Austin, he has made an effort to help students undertake real-world projects, like building an educational webpage for a local museum. Such efforts position the student not as a consumer, but as a “partner and collaborator and creator of knowledge,” he said. And it shows communities that college instills in its students important skills—and isn’t always just an amorphous ivory tower.

    1. Fast turnover of college leaders is contributing to the lack of public trust.

    In the same panel about trust, multiple speakers touched on the fact that administrative turnover can be a major impediment to trust-building on campus.

    University presidents last, on average, just over five years on the job, which means that most students see at least one presidential turnover in their college career. Each new president must rebuild trust not only with the constituents on their own campus, but also with alumni, government officials, the local community and beyond.

    Short tenures also make it difficult for students and employees to buy in to key university initiatives, considering it’s not uncommon for a new president to scrap the previous administration’s projects in favor of new priorities.

    “Trust is about relationships … and you don’t build trust overnight. You build trust through listening. You build trust through showing up. You build trust through showing proof points. That’s how it happens. So, you can’t build trust when you’re a president that’s been there three months,” said Bobbie Laur, president of Campus Compact, a nonprofit focused on civic and community engagement in higher education. “Some of what we’re facing is the reality of the short tenure of leaders without the necessary support structures to support leaders right now.”

    Saanvi Arora, a UC Berkeley student and the executive director of the Youth Power Project, a nonprofit that encourages young people to participate in public policy, agreed, noting that she has met numerous college students who have no idea what their institution’s president looks like.

    “That’s a huge problem, if you’re not meeting with students directly, showing up to spaces where it really matters for students to see you there,” she said. “It really makes a difference and moves the needle.”

    1. Universities need to do more to stanch the spread of misinformation.

    Misinformation is pervasive in the current vitriolic political environment, according to a panel of experts, but so is anger and skepticism toward the very researchers who aim to better understand the phenomenon.

    Simone Chambers, chair of political science at UC Irvine, pointed out that research shows misinformation is more likely to circulate in right-wing communities. But that research is then called partisan, sometimes even by politicians themselves; mis- and disinformation experts who studied incorrect information ahead of the 2020 election earned intense ire from congressional Republicans, who accused them of censoring free speech and subpoenaed data about what was being marked as inaccurate information.

    That’s compounded by the perennial problem of most, if not all, academic research: Few people see it. Michael Wagner, who leads the Center for Communication and Civic Renewal at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, said that universities could make a greater effort to get the work of misinformation researchers into the public’s hands.

    Universities must do “a more aggressive job of promoting the work, even when it highlights partisan asymmetries, even when it highlights other kinds of things that might leave universities open to attack from those who don’t like the fact that universities exist,” said Wagner, who noted that his center has been subpoenaed by Congress. “[That] is something they need to do a better job of, to help the researchers who are trying to do this stuff get their work out there to folks so that they can engage with it and decide how they want to incorporate that information into how they live their lives.”

    1. More college leaders should stand up for higher education.

    Colleges have been capitulating to the Trump administration in everything from rolling back diversity, equity and inclusion programs to, in Columbia’s case, at least, agreeing to a list of the administration’s demands in the hopes of having its federal funding unfrozen.

    But a small number of college presidents—including Wesleyan University’s Michael Roth and Princeton University’s Christopher Eisgruber, who were both cited by panelists at the conference—have spoken forcefully against the Trump administration’s attacks on political speech, DEI and free scientific inquiry. In an op-ed in Slate about the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University alumnus and pro-Palestinian activist who was detained a month ago by immigration officials, Roth wrote, “University presidents must speak out against this attempt to control the political culture of our campuses from the White House. Just as we should decry antisemitism and other forms of discrimination, we should insist that students and faculty have the right to make their voices heard about the issues of the day. Neutrality here is a betrayal of our academic mission.”

    Kristen Shahverdian, program director of campus free speech at PEN America, a free expression nonprofit, said she is glad she doesn’t have to be a part of any internal conversations about how a university under fire by the Trump administration will react. Still, she said, she wishes more higher education leaders would emulate Roth and Eisgruber and that the higher education sector as a whole could come together as a united front.

    “There’s probably multiple reasons why they’re able to speak out and others maybe can’t,” she said. “[But] we really need to push back, to hold on to the values of higher education, which include freedom of expression and academic freedom.”

    Source link

  • University of Florida Signs Agreement With ICE

    University of Florida Signs Agreement With ICE

    The University of Florida has signed an agreement to partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help crack down on undocumented students, according to The Independent Florida Alligator, a student publication.

    The Florida Phoenix confirmed the report with a UF spokesperson, who said the university had agreed to deputize campus police as immigration officers but did not provide more details.

    The news broke the day after UF students held a rally on campus to protest the arrest and self-deportation of a Colombian student whom ICE agents stopped in late March for driving with an expired registration.

    UF is not the first institution in the state to commit to working with ICE; Florida Atlantic University signed a similar agreement earlier this month.

    Source link

  • Antisemitism Task Force Weighing Consent Decree for Columbia

    Antisemitism Task Force Weighing Consent Decree for Columbia

    The federal task force investigating Columbia University for its alleged failures to address antisemitism is considering putting the Ivy League institution under a consent decree, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

    A consent decree would add legal heft to the task force’s recent demands and hold Columbia accountable to following through on its recent commitments to overhaul disciplinary processes, ban masks at protests and review academic programs focused on the Middle East, among other changes. Under a consent decree, a federal judge would have oversight over the university.

    Columbia would have to agree to enter a consent decree, according to the Journal. The government has used consent decrees in the past to force police departments to make reforms, particularly after high-profile incidents of brutality, and also to hold companies, such as Live Nation, accountable.

    The university recently agreed to make a number of changes in order to restore its federal funds after the task force canceled $400 million in grants and contracts to Columbia. More recently, the Trump administration reportedly froze all of Columbia’s NIH funding, an additional $250 million. 

    The task force “doesn’t think Columbia is a good-faith actor willing to make the significant changes on campuses necessary to curb what it thinks are civil-rights infractions against Jewish students,” the Journal reported.

    Source link

  • Fewer Students Engage in College Activities After COVID

    Fewer Students Engage in College Activities After COVID

    Higher education professionals have noted that today’s students are less engaged than previous classes. Many experts attribute this shift to the lack of socialization caused by COVID-19 stay-at-home orders. But according to a recently published study, students’ participation rates have been declining for the past decade.

    A March report from the Student Experience in the Research University (SERU) Consortium found that while student engagement in various on-campus activities—including academic, civic, career, extracurricular and research work—has trended upward since 2020, rates are still lower than they were in 2019.

    “The pandemic brought great disruption to [engagement] … and the narrative around is that, ‘Oh, things are back to normal. We’re operating normally.’ And it looks like, you know, on campuses, the pandemic has been forgotten … but in the data, in fact, we don’t see that,” said Igor Chirikov, senior researcher and SERU Consortium director.

    Methodology

    The report includes 10 years’ worth of survey and institutional data by the SERU Consortium, including 1.1 million student survey responses from 22 major research universities. The consortium is based at the Center for Studies in Higher Education at the University of California, Berkeley, and research was done in partnership with the University of Minnesota and the evaluation firm Etio.

    “Pre-pandemic” data is categorized as responses collected between 2016 and 2019, and “post-pandemic” data reaches 2023. Survey respondents were all students at R-1 residential universities with high retention and graduation rates (ranging from 82 to 94 percent).

    Overall declines: Researchers used the engagement indicators from 2018–19 as the reference point to mark the distinction between pre- and post-pandemic testing. All charts are focused on change, so they do not signify a decline in units (such as hours spent studying) but they do present an opportunity for comparison between indicators, Chirikov said.

    Most indicators of campus involvement have declined since the onset of COVID-19, with few recovering to pre-pandemic levels as of 2023.

    Academically, students reported significant differences in the amount of time studying in and outside of class, as well as in interacting with faculty members. Studying with peers also took a dip during the pandemic, but a relatively small one, which researchers said could be due to the shift to online and hybrid formats that created virtual study groups and other digital interactions.

    During the 2020–21 academic year, the share of students who indicated that their professor knew or had learned their name declined, as did their confidence that they knew a professor well enough to ask for a letter of recommendation for a job or graduate school. Both factors made slight improvement during the 2022–23 academic year, but they remain below pre-pandemic levels.

    The question about recommendation letters is one that interests Chirikov, particularly as universities are growing their enrollment and the student-faculty ratio increases. “I think that shows to what extent students have a person on campus, like a faculty member that knows them, that knows their work and can put in a good word for them,” he said.

    Participation in faculty-led research also dropped, from 25 percent of students in 2018–19 to 20 percent in 2022–23. Wealthy students were 50 percent more likely to assist in faculty research, compared to their low-income peers.

    “These are research universities, so part of their mission is to engage students in research and work in the lab, and we see, again, both declines and equity gaps in all this,” Chirikov said. “A lot of these opportunities are unpaid, and students coming from low-income families, they just cannot afford it. It’s becoming a luxury for rich kids.”

    Involvement in extracurricular activities, interestingly, increased during the 2020–21 academic year, which researchers theorize could be due to students seeking new ways to connect with their peers amid social distancing measures.

    “This indicator relies less on university infrastructure and opportunities; students worked themselves to restore that, to extend and create a different environment and spaces for communication and development friendship,” Chirikov said.

    The following year, extracurricular involvement declined to below pre-pandemic levels. Students committed fewer hours to student groups and were less likely to hold a leadership role.

    Since the pandemic, students have spent less time performing community service or volunteering and are less likely to have academic service-learning or community-based learning experiences.

    On-campus employment also took a hit—fewer students indicated they worked on campus during 2022–23 compared to 2018–19, and employed students reported working one fewer hour per week. In addition, a smaller number of students said they completed an internship, practicum or field experience, which aligns with national trends that show that students are having more difficulty securing internships. Conversely, off-campus employment rates increased after the pandemic, though the number of hours students work has dropped.

    Sowing Success

    Noting barriers to access or confusion among students over how to get plugged in on campus, some colleges and universities have created new programming to address participation gaps.

    • Goucher College created micro-experiences in service learning to allow learners to participate in small-scale or one-day projects, opening doors for students who are engaged in other spaces on campus.
    • The University of Miami offers a precollege webinar series to support incoming students who receive Federal Work-Study dollars in identifying and securing on-campus employment opportunities.
    • San Francisco State University, part of the California State University system, established an online hub for students to identify research and creative activities that may interest them, removing informational barriers to participation.
    • Virginia Commonwealth University encourages faculty members to hold open office hours that meet across disciplines to facilitate greater interaction between learners and professors.

    Across various engagement opportunities, college juniors and seniors were more likely to report participation, which could be tied to previous involvement before the COVID-19 pandemic, or an increased personal investment in achieving postgraduate success.

    All demographic factors were controlled, so a changing student population has no effect on the overall trends, Chirikov said.

    So what? Based on their findings, researchers recommend higher education revitalize engagement opportunities for students, particularly in the fields of research, community connections, student organization and career development programs.

    Federal cuts to research may further disrupt this trend, which Chirikov hypothesizes will differ according to discipline and funding losses.

    Additionally, institutions should address gaps in participation among different demographics, such as low-income and working-class students, who may experience financial and time deficits, Chirikov and his co-authors wrote.

    Researchers are currently unpacking 2024 data to see which of these trends have continued or if there were new changes, Chirikov said.

    We bet your colleague would like this article, too. Send them this link to subscribe to our newsletter on Student Success.

    Source link

  • Embattled University of West Florida Trustee Resigns

    Embattled University of West Florida Trustee Resigns

    Scott Yenor, chair of the Board of Trustees at the University of West Florida, resigned Wednesday ahead of a looming fight with lawmakers, The Pensacola News Journal reported.

    Yenor, a political science professor at Boise State University, made national headlines in 2021 when he made misogynistic remarks at the National Conservatism Conference, taking aim at feminism and arguing that women should not pursue certain career fields, such as engineering.

    He also described “independent women” as “medicated, meddlesome and quarrelsome.”

    Yenor and other conservative trustees appointed at UWF in January faced protests from the community. But it was ultimately pressure from state lawmakers over other remarks that seemed to push Yenor out. In a series of social media posts in February, Yenor seemed to imply that only straight white men should be in political leadership posts. Some critics, including Randy Fine, a Republican state senator at the time of the post, read his remarks as exclusionary of Jewish men. (Fine recently won a special election to represent Florida’s First Congressional District.)

    Fine, who is Jewish, subsequently called Yenor a “bigot” and “misogynist.”

    Under Florida law, a trustee appointed by the governor can begin serving immediately, before confirmation by the State Legislature. With the confirmation process underway, Yenor stepped aside amid speculation that lawmakers could refuse to sign off on his appointment.

    “Gov. Ron DeSantis’ higher education reforms are models for the country,” Yenor wrote in a resignation email obtained by The Pensacola News Journal. “I was looking forward to bringing the Governor’s positive vision for higher education to the University of West Florida (UWF) as a member of the Board of Trustees. Opposition to my nomination among a group within Florida’s senate, however, leads me to resign from UWF’s Board of Trustees effectively immediately.”

    The potential rejection would mark a rare break between DeSantis and Florida’s Republican-dominated Legislature, which has largely supported the governor’s agenda during his time in office. Earlier this year, the Senate Appropriations Committee did not confirm Adam Kissel, another UWF board appointee, though there is still a path for him to be confirmed anyway. In 2023, the Florida Senate rejected another DeSantis pick and bumped Eddie Speir from the New College of Florida board simply by not taking action on the confirmation rather than rejecting it.

    Source link

  • Penn to Lose Security Clearance in Trump Attack

    Penn to Lose Security Clearance in Trump Attack

    President Donald Trump signed a directive Wednesday removing the security clearances of University of Pennsylvania community members, the latest government action to pummel the president’s alma mater.

    In the directive, Trump, a 1968 Wharton School of Business graduate, ordered the Department of Justice to investigate Miles Taylor, a former senior Department of Homeland Security official who has criticized the president, including in a 2018 New York Times op-ed and in a book in which he alleges presidential misconduct during Trump’s first term.

    Taylor taught an undergraduate course at Penn in fall 2023 called The Future of Conservatism and the GOP, according to The Daily Pennsylvanian, and it’s this tie that has put Penn in the crosshairs.

    Trump’s memo asks the attorney general, the director of national intelligence and other relevant department and agency heads to suspend the security clearances held by Taylor “and any individuals at entities associated with Taylor, including the University of Pennsylvania.”

    According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Penn does not conduct classified research and has no security clearance.

    “The University does not possess a government security clearance and cannot as a corporate entity possess classified material,” the website states. “It is the policy of the university not to accept agreements which require access to classified data, require university employees to obtain security clearances, or restrict the dissemination of the results.”

    Penn is also currently facing a $175 million funding freeze from the federal government, announced in March, related to participation of a transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team in 2022. The university was further affected by visa revocations of international students and scholars earlier this week.

    Source link

  • Committee Withdraws Request for Northwestern Docs

    Committee Withdraws Request for Northwestern Docs

    The House Education and the Workforce Committee is no longer seeking records related to legal clinics at Northwestern University after a group of law professors sued over the request.

    The committee took issue with the university’s Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic representing pro-Palestinian activists and sought information about the budget and funding sources for the Bluhm Legal Clinic and its more than 20 clinics and 12 centers. Two professors—one of them is Sheila Bedi, the director of the offending clinic—argued that the congressional probe violated their rights and the rights of their clients.

    “The Committee’s demands exceed its authority and have no valid legislative purpose; they are an attempt to investigate, intimidate, and punish institutions and individuals that the Committee has deemed ‘left-wing;’ and they violate the federal Constitution,” the complaint reads. “Immediate relief is necessary to prevent irreparable harm.”

    The committee withdrew the request during an emergency hearing in federal court in Chicago in response to the lawsuit, according to a news release Thursday from the plaintiffs.

    “I filed this suit to defend my clients’ rights to representation, my students’ rights to learn, and my right to teach,” Bedi said in the release. “But today’s decision won’t stop the federal government’s attacks on universities and the legal profession. Educators and institutions must stand united to protect our students, our communities, and each other.”

    Rep. Tim Walberg, a Michigan Republican and chair of the committee, said in a statement that the decision to withdraw the request doesn’t mean “our foot [is] off the gas.”

    “The failures of schools across the country to follow their own rules and federal law to ensure a safe environment for Jewish students and faculty is unacceptable,” Walberg said. “Discussions with Northwestern about our concerns will continue. We seek answers that are critical to informing legislation that will address this national problem, and all tools are on the table, including compulsory measures.”

    Source link

  • News Decoder helps launch digital student journalism tool

    News Decoder helps launch digital student journalism tool

    Gathering and assessing the quality of information is one of the most effective ways to develop media literacy, critical thinking and effective communication skills. But without guidance, too many young people fail to question the reliability of visual images and overly rely on the first results they find on Google.

    That’s why News Decoder has been working with the Swedish nonprofit, Voice4You, on a project called ProMS to create a self-guided digital tool that guides students in writing news stories.

    The tool, called Mobile Stories, is now available across Europe. It takes students step-by-step through the journalistic process. Along the way, they gain critical thinking skills and a deeper understanding about the information they find, consume and share.

    It empowers students to develop multimedia stories that incorporate original reporting for school, community or global audiences, with minimal input from educators. It comes with open-access learning resources developed by News Decoder.

    After a decade of success in Sweden, Voice4You partnered with News Decoder to help make the tool available across Europe and the globe. Throughout the ProMS project, new English language content suitable for high schoolers was developed and piloted in 21 schools in Romania, Ireland and Finland. The Mobile Stories platform has demonstrated remarkable potential in building student confidence and media and information literacy by providing a platform and an opportunity to produce quality journalism.

    From story pitch to publication

    Using the new international version of Mobile Stories, students have already published 136 articles on mobilestories.com, with another 700 currently in production. Their topics range from book reviews and reporting from local cultural events to in-depth feature articles on the decline in young people’s mental health and child labor in the fast fashion industry.

    “The tool looks like a blogging platform and on every step along the way of creating an article, students can access learning materials including video tutorials by professional journalists from around the world, articles and worksheets,” said News Decoder’s ProMS Project Manager Sabīne Bērziņa.

    Some of these resources, such as videos and worksheets are open access, available to all.

    Source link

  • Growing Orchids Amid Dandelions at Work (opinion)

    Growing Orchids Amid Dandelions at Work (opinion)

    Many of us working in higher education, including those of us in teaching and learning centers, might find that our work is dramatically accelerated by rapid technological change and increasing pressures to be more efficient and productive. Technology adoptions such as smartphones and Slack, video communication, and now generative AI all contribute to the acceleration of the organizational culture.

    In her recent essay “Teaching Centers Aren’t Dumping Grounds,” Kerry O’Grady argues that many academic leaders “focus on more instead of on effectiveness and efficiency.” O’Grady recounts continued calls to “create more workshops, more one-pagers or more training when attendance was dismal for initial sessions, or when the original documents went untouched.” She argues that educational developers are in a constant state of emergency response, in which they are tasked with “retroactive cleanup” as opposed to “the work of proactive planning for teaching and learning success.” O’Grady calls for a much-needed reset—something that feels wonderfully exciting—and institutionally unrealistic.

    Our collective teaching and working in higher education at more than 20 institutions over 50 years tells us that we are always working with limited agency to significantly change how our centers align with our strategic vision and the changing needs of the institution. Amid the dizzying pace of constant disruption, we feel a need to find a more sustainable and pragmatic approach. O’Grady’s essay inspired us to reflect on our strategic plans and how we support our respective communities. While the “dumping ground” metaphor importantly calls attention to current challenges, we consider a different metaphor that has guided our decisions as we direct centers and support educators.

    The Dandelion and the Orchid

    Dandelions are versatile flowers—resilient, fast-growing and abundant. In the context of educational development, dandelions represent the many ways developers adapt to institutional demands, producing quick outputs that propagate widely. Dandelion work is essential: It includes the programs and resources we create rapidly to meet pressing needs. However, as with real dandelions, the results of this work are often scattered, growing without the intentional design of a cultivated garden. When we run from meeting to meeting or throw together a one-off workshop to respond to emerging pedagogical issues, we rely on dandelions.

    In contrast, orchids require significant care and controlled environments to flourish. Orchid work symbolizes slow, intentional cultivation—projects that are thoughtfully nurtured over time. These efforts demand patience, consistency and a commitment to depth over breadth. While the process is slower, the results are uniquely meaningful, reflecting a product of deliberate focus. Orchid work requires long-term planning, collaboration across units and thoughtful engagement. While orchids can result in beautiful landscapes, the time taken to cultivate them can mean that we miss many emergent day-to-day needs.

    Together, this framework highlights a central question: Which systemic issues require sustained effort, and which challenges can be addressed through quick, one-off engagements? Balancing dandelion and orchid approaches helps educational developers respond to immediate needs while creating space for intentional growth.

    Growing Relationships

    Resilience does not sprout in isolation but through networks of care, mutual support and shared experiences. To push the floral metaphor further, if our goal in centers for teaching and learning is to help educators help students bloom, then we need to model and promote the space and time needed to learn, even if social pressures point in the opposite direction.

    Although meaningful relationships take time to develop, their benefits are powerful. Research supports the idea that individuals with a high relational self-construal—those who define themselves through their relationships with others—may be better able to embrace inconsistency and instability (two things that very much describe life in education today). Educational developers therefore can foster resilience and adaptability not only by caring for relational networks at their institution but also by defining their work based on such networks.

    In our own ways, we make space for orchids in our work and programming by emphasizing the ways in which relationships and time are necessary conditions for educational development. Some of the ways we do this as we go about our regular, day-to-day “dandelion” programming include:

    Balancing the orchid and the dandelion depends on priorities and time constraints. The dandelion approach can produce quick solutions when the pressure is high, and the orchid approach encourages us to carve out the time and tend to our relationships even in our constant push to maintain that field of flowers.

    While it may disrupt our metaphor, dandelions can give way to orchids and orchids can give way to dandelions. After all, the more often that deeper relationships develop, the more often we’re going to be in contact with faculty and colleagues, which will seed new ideas and possibilities, be they orchids or dandelions.

    The metaphor encourages us to ask how and where we can make space and time for deeper engagement. We cannot just grow a field of dandelions if we want to foster a culture of innovation, nor can we respond effectively and in a timely manner to an institution’s needs if we just focus on orchids. We have found that giving ourselves the permission to grow orchids amid the dandelions allows us to feel more agency and more relationally connected to the work we’re doing and the people we’re doing it with. The metaphor has helped us foster and model a more inclusive, supportive academic culture—one that balances collaboration with efficiency, collective resilience with institutional responsiveness and meaning with productivity.

    JT Torres directs the Houston H. Harte Center for Teaching and Learning at Washington & Lee University.

    Lance Eaton is an educator, writer and public speaker. He has worked in educational development for 15 years and recently became the senior associate director of AI in teaching and learning at Northeastern University.

    Deborah Kronenberg is an educator, consultant and public speaker who approaches communities of learning with creative, interdisciplinary, relationship-centric leadership in faculty and administrative roles in the greater Boston area.

    Source link