Tag: News

  • Turning Point’s Student Membership Keeps Growing

    Turning Point’s Student Membership Keeps Growing

    Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed Sept. 10.

    Trent Nelson/The Salt Lake Tribune/Getty Images News/Getty Images

    Three months after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the footprint of the right-wing youth organization he founded continues to grow on college campuses.

    This week, Turning Point USA chapters at both Indiana University Bloomington and the University of Oklahoma reported membership surges. According to the Indiana Daily Student (IDS) and Indy Star, IU’s chapter says its membership has tripled this fall, from 180 to 363. At the University of Oklahoma—which put an instructor on leave after the Turning Point chapter accused them of “viewpoint discrimination”—the group’s membership has grown from 15 to 2,000 over the past year, NBC reported.

    Those increases follow other local media reports about new chapters and membership growth at scores of other universities across the country, including the University of Missouri, and Vanderbilt and Brigham Young Universities. Within eight days of Kirk’s death, Turning Point said it received messages from 62,000 students interested in starting a new chapter or getting involved with one.

    “I think that our club has kind of become a beacon for conservatives,” a Turning Point chapter member told IDS, Indiana University at Bloomington’s campus newspaper. “So, after his death, more people showed up, more people got involved, and it was really nice to kind of see a scene in the way people wanted to get involved.”

    Kirk founded Turning Point USA in 2012, with the mission of “to identify, educate, train, and organize students to promote the principles of freedom, free markets, and limited government.”

    He gained notoriety in conservative circles by traveling to college campuses across the country, challenging students to prove wrong his conservative stances on topics such as race, gender, abortion and immigration.

    On Sept. 10, Kirk was speaking to a crowd at Utah Valley University when a gunman fatally shot him in the neck. After his death, Trump and his allies moved to canonize Kirk as an exemplar of civic debate—and called to punish anyone who publicly disagreed. Numerous colleges and universities have since suspended or fired faculty and staff who criticized Kirk for his political views.

    Although some faculty and students have objected to new Turning Point chapters, the students growing the organization insist they’re committed to considering all perspectives.

    “You have a place here, you’ll always have a place here,” Jack Henning, president of Indiana University’s Turning Point chapter, told IDS. “We don’t discriminate against any viewpoints at all, we debate them. That’s what American democracy was built upon.”

    Source link

  • Helping Students Achieve Economic Mobility

    Helping Students Achieve Economic Mobility

    Colleges that help provide economic mobility for first-generation and low-income students are more likely to have recruitment and retention practices that focus on sense of belonging.

    FatCamera/E+/Getty Images

    As college students have become more diverse over the past few decades, a growing focus in education policy has centered on the university’s role in influencing their economic mobility.

    New research from Public Agenda evaluates the promising practices colleges and universities employ to improve the earning potential of students from low-income families and provide a stronger return on investment, compared to other institutions.

    The report outlines three primary themes across policies and practices to advance student success: involving families, creating supportive campus systems, and investing resources in low-income students.

    Survey says: Two in five students said one of their main reasons for attending college is to increase their earnings potential, according to data from Inside Higher Ed’s 2025 Student Voice survey. The most popular response was “to pursue a specific career or profession,” followed by “to gain knowledge and skills.”

    Students aged 25 and older were more likely to signal they enrolled to increase earnings potential (53 percent), as were students working full-time (48 percent) and those attending two-year colleges (44 percent), compared to their traditional-aged peers or four-year counterparts.

    Methodology: Staff at Public Agenda traveled to 10 colleges or universities in Michigan, Texas and California in 2024 to conduct interviews with administrators, faculty and staff; they also held focus groups with students and alumni. In addition to the qualitative research, Public Agenda leveraged data from the Department of Education’s College Scorecard to evaluate trends in socioeconomic mobility by institution type and student persona.

    The research: One of the overarching takeaways Public Agenda staff gleaned from their site visits was that the institutions most effective in boosting students’ economic mobility tended to value and respect student-facing staff and their perspectives on improving systems.

    “Success at the institutions we studied depends on cultivating an environment in which everyone recognizes that the people who interact directly with students possess the most important information and have the clearest ideas about how to fix problems,” according to the report.

    The evaluated colleges prioritized recruiting first-generation students and engaging with their families to help them understand the accessibility and value of higher education, because they were most likely to go straight into the workforce from high school, rather than consider college.

    “When senior leaders and front-line staff at these institutions refer to ‘the competition,’ they are talking about the forces pulling students away from college—not about other colleges,” the report said.

    It also noted that families and local schools are invited to campus for various events to establish familiarity and comfort with the institution. Offering resources in various languages or connecting families with bilingual staff can build trust and demonstrate commitment. Hiring staff who share identities with students, or are alumni themselves, can create a support system that helps first-gen and low-income students feel seen and understood.

    “The baseline of shared experience functions as a lubricant, reducing friction in efforts to achieve commonality of purpose among everyone working at the institution,” according to the report.

    Providing peer-to-peer resources and creating physical spaces on campus that engage learners can also establish a sense of belonging.

    In addition, researchers noted that creating affordable pathways to education can increase students’ overall economic mobility. Each of the states evaluated had some form of state funding for low-income students to enroll in college, and many had institution-level initiatives that bridge funding gaps between the Pell Grant and state dollars.

    In addition to meeting tuition costs, colleges invested dollars in data systems that relieved staff of burdensome administrative duties and increased the number of academic advisers on campus to provide more personalized, one-on-one advice and encouragement for students.

    Other trends: Researchers also underscored the role of financial stability in achieving socioeconomic mobility for low-income students. Financial obstacles and personal challenges are the top reasons students leave college.

    Ensuring students are aware of how to access emergency aid on campus or other social support benefits, such as food pantries or childcare assistance, is also critical, researchers wrote.

    Many low-income students work while enrolled, so creating opportunities for student employment on campus or connecting students to meaningful employment experiences can help them stay on track to graduate and develop career skills.

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

    Source link

  • How an AI-generated song transformed my ELL classroom

    How an AI-generated song transformed my ELL classroom

    Key points:

    A trending AI song went viral, but in my classroom, it did something even more powerful: it unlocked student voice.

    When teachers discuss AI in education, the conversation often focuses on risk: plagiarism, misinformation, or over-reliance on tools. But in my English Language Learners (ELL) classroom, a simple AI-generated song unexpectedly became the catalyst for one of the most joyful, culturally rich, and academically productive lessons of the year.

    It began with a trending headline about an AI-created song that topped a music chart metric. The story was interesting, but what truly captured my attention was its potential as a learning moment: music, identity, language, culture, creativity, and critical thinking–all wrapped in one accessible trend.

    What followed was a powerful reminder that when we honor students’ voices and languages, motivation flourishes, confidence grows, and even the shyest learners can find their space to shine.

    Why music works for ELLs

    Music has always been a powerful tool for language development. Research consistently shows that rhythm, repetition, and melody support vocabulary acquisition, pronunciation, and memory (Schön et al., 2008). For multilingual learners, songs are more than entertainment–they are cultural artifacts and linguistic resources.

    But AI-generated songs add a new dimension. According to UNESCO’s Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research (2023), AI trends can serve as “entry points for student-centered learning” when used as prompts for analysis, creativity, and discussion rather than passive consumption.

    In this lesson, AI wasn’t the final product; it was the spark. It was neutral, playful, and contemporary–a topic students were naturally curious about. This lowered the affective filter (Krashen, 1982), making students more willing to take risks with language and participate actively.

    From AI trend to multilingual dialogue

    Phase 1: Listening and critical analysis

    We listened to the AI-generated song as a group. Students were immediately intrigued, posing questions such as:

    “How does the computer make a song?”

    “Does it copy another singer?”

    “Why does it sound real?”

    These sparked critical thinking naturally aligned with Bloom’s Taxonomy:

    • Understanding: What is the song about?
    • Analyzing: How does it compare to a human-written song?
    • Evaluating: Is AI music truly ‘creative’?

    Students analyzed the lyrics, identifying figurative language, tone, and structure. Even lower-proficiency learners contributed by highlighting repeated phrases or simple vocabulary.

    Phase 2: The power of translanguaging

    The turning point came when I invited students to choose a song from their home language and bring a short excerpt to share. The classroom transformed instantly.

    Students became cultural guides and storytellers. They explained why a song mattered, translated its meaning into English, discussed metaphors from their cultures, or described musical traditions from home.

    This is translanguaging–using the full linguistic repertoire to make meaning, an approach strongly supported by García & Li (2014) and widely encouraged in TESOL practice.

    Phase 3: Shy learners found their voices

    What surprised me most was the participation of my shyest learners.

    A student who had not spoken aloud all week read translated lyrics from a Kurdish lullaby. Two Yemeni students, usually quiet, collaborated to explain a line of poetry.

    This aligns with research showing that culturally familiar content reduces performance anxiety and increases willingness to communicate (MacIntyre, 2007). When students feel emotionally connected to the material, participation becomes safer and joyful.

    One student said, “This feels like home.”

    By the end of the lesson, every student participated, whether by sharing a song, translating a line, or contributing to analysis.

    Embedding digital and ethical literacy

    Beyond cultural sharing, students engaged in deeper reflection essential for digital literacy (OECD, 2021):

    • Who owns creativity if AI can produce songs?
    • Should AI songs compete with human artists?
    • Does language lose meaning when generated artificially?

    Students debated respectfully, used sentence starters, and justified their opinions, developing both critical reasoning and AI literacy.

    Exit tickets: Evidence of deeper learning

    Students completed exit tickets:

    • One thing I learned about AI-generated music
    • One thing I learned from someone else’s culture
    • One question I still have

    Their responses showed genuine depth:

    • “AI makes us think about what creativity means.”
    • “My friend’s song made me understand his country better.”
    • “I didn’t know Kurdish has words that don’t translate, you need feeling to explain it.”

    The research behind the impact

    This lesson’s success is grounded in research:

    • Translanguaging Enhances Cognition (García & Li, 2014): allowing all languages improves comprehension and expression.
    • Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000): the lesson fostered autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
    • Lowering the Affective Filter (Krashen, 1982): familiar music reduced anxiety.
    • Digital Literacy Matters (UNESCO, 2023; OECD, 2021): students must analyze AI, not just use it.

    Conclusion: A small trend with big impact

    An AI-generated song might seem trivial, but when transformed thoughtfully, it became a bridge, between languages, cultures, abilities, and levels of confidence.

    In a time when schools are still asking how to use AI meaningfully, this lesson showed that the true power of AI lies not in replacing learning, but in opening doors for every learner to express who they are.

    I encourage educators to try this activity–not to teach AI, but rather to teach humanity.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Career Guidance Falls Short for California College Students

    Career Guidance Falls Short for California College Students

    About 40 percent of students participate in work-based learning, but access to such programs is not equitable.

    Phynart Studio/Getty Images

    A new report found that only one in five California college students were fully satisfied with the career guidance they received, with many saying the help often arrived too late.

    The data, released by California Competes, comes as more than 80 percent of first-year college students say obtaining a better job is a very important reason they enrolled in college.

    “There’s a real opportunity for higher ed to do better because students want more and there’s a lot of room for improvement,” said Su Jin Jez, chief executive officer of California Competes, a nonpartisan organization focused on research and policy to improve the state’s higher education and workforce development.

    “It’s really critical, particularly as more first generation students, more low income students, and more students of color are going to college,” Jez said. “These students are more likely to not have professional networks in their homes and in their families, so they really need guidance from higher ed.”

    The research, conducted in collaboration with the College Futures Foundation and Strada Education Foundation, analyzed data from more than 5,000 California college students and recent graduates who responded to the 2023 Strada-College Pulse survey, which examined employment outcomes, student access to quality coaching and work-based learning, and the alignment between postsecondary education and state job requirements.

    By examining students’ experiences with career guidance and work-based learning, as well as their early career outcomes, the report found that many lack sufficient preparation for meaningful employment.

    The research identified opportunities to strengthen college-to-career pathways and boost economic mobility.

    Career Pathways Guidance

    About 60 percent of students reported receiving some form of career guidance, and 50 percent said they received information about potential earnings in careers related to their academic programs before the end of their first year.

    But only 20 percent reported feeling very satisfied with the career guidance they received.

    When asked where they got their career advice, 66 percent said they received it from college faculty and staff, followed by 59 percent who said they relied on family and friends.

    “Higher ed makes a lot of sense to be the ones to provide career guidance because they know better than other entities what skills students are learning,” Jez said. “They can help them connect to employers, particularly alumni networks, which are really powerful connectors.”

    Work-Based Learning

    About 40 percent of near-graduates participated in work-based learning, with internships being the most common type.

    The report found that internship participation was associated with better early career outcomes for students, greater satisfaction with their education, and a stronger sense of return on their investment, compared with those who did not intern.

    But access to work-based learning remains inequitable, with 50 percent reporting that course loads were too heavy and 48 percent saying they were uncertain about how to find opportunities.

    “Colleges should integrate work-based learning into their programs of study, into majors, so that it becomes a real pathway and not just a privilege,” Jez said.

    “It makes their heavy course load issue not as critical,” Jez said. “And then, similarly, it takes the burden off of students to find the internship because the university will have already identified the internships that make sense for the students based on their major.”

    Jez cited Compton College, El Camino College, and West Los Angeles College as good examples of institutions that place work-based learning at the center of their programs.

    “They approach employers and think together about where a work-based learning opportunity fits well into their programs because it’s not something that has to be unique to every campus,” Jez said, adding that colleges collaborating on such efforts helps streamline the process for employers who are often approached by multiple institutions.

    “Huge kudos to them for tackling this work that’s hard on your own, but even more challenging to do collaboratively,” Jez said.

    Early Career Outcomes

    The report also found that less than half of recent graduates are highly satisfied with their first job or their career progress.

    “This is not a new issue, but I do think that just because it’s not new doesn’t make it not problematic,” Jez said. “I would love for higher ed institutions to really think about this early on.”

    She noted that colleges should consider students’ early career outcomes even before they matriculate.

    “I think a lot of people will say that higher ed isn’t vocational,” Jez said. “[But] it is the reason why people are going to college today and it has to help students make good transitions into work.”

    Jez highlighted California’s recent establishment of the California Education Interagency Council, a statewide coordinating body aimed at breaking down silos between higher education and workforce development efforts.

    “This is something we’ve advocated for,” Jez said, adding that the council will help set a strategic plan and address cross-sector issues.

    “If we’re serious about strengthening the value of higher education, the first step is listening to students’ needs,” Jez said. “They know what they need and they know the struggle they’ve had.”

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

    Source link

  • 3 Questions for U-M Suzanne Dove

    3 Questions for U-M Suzanne Dove

    The last time we caught up with Suzanne Dove in September of 2024, she was serving as the assistant vice president, strategy and innovation at Bentley University. This past May, Suzanne started a new role as Chief Education Solutions Officer in the Center for Academic Innovation (CAI) at the University of Michigan (U-M). Now, a few months in her new role, I thought this would be a good time to check in with Suzanne.

    Q1: Tell us about your new job. What does a Chief Education Solutions Office do? Where does your role fit in with CAI and U-M as a whole?

    A: At the Center for Academic Innovation, my role as the inaugural Chief Education Solutions Officer (or CESO) is to open a new learning innovation horizon for the Center and help U-M achieve its next tier of educational impact. I do this by creating sustainable strategic partnerships that enable us to serve workforce and talent development needs of external organizations. 

    CAI has long been known for offering well-designed, U-M faculty-led online courses to millions of learners and thousands of organizations. This breadth gives us an advantage: Our teams have developed tacit knowledge as well as processes to stand up and scale successful programs ranging from MOOCs on platforms, like Coursera, to U-M online degree programs to innovative short-form offerings and integration of advanced technology into hybrid, online and residential learning. 

    With Michigan Online giving us even more flexibility, we can go further. We are positioned to partner directly with organizations that need high-quality workforce and talent development and offering features that both learning and development leaders and adult learners value, such as cohort-based learning, live sessions with U-M faculty, and customized content.

    Like any new leadership role, a big part of my job is setting strategic priorities and putting the right operational structures in place. Equally important, if not more so, is building strong, collaborative relationships across three overlapping circles.

    The first is CAI itself, a community of experts in online learning, project management, marketing, media production, ed tech and more who make it possible as I build the Education Solutions team to engage with external partners and craft relevant offerings that fit their needs. The second is leaders and faculty across U-M, many of whom are excited about expanding the university’s reach to nondegree learners and appreciate how our team brings market insights and industry relationships. The third circle is external organizations that are serious about upskilling their employees and are challenging the status quo around professional development and work-based learning.  The partnerships I’m most energized by are those that challenge us to design innovative learning solutions that benefit learners, their organizations and the university. For a thriving workforce in a rapidly shifting landscape, we need to move boldly.

    Right now, my day-to-day focus is on three things, in collaboration with other teams within CAI: building a strong partnership pipeline, making sure there’s a good fit between partners’ needs and CAI’s offerings, and ensuring we can deliver these solutions efficiently through Michigan Online. There’s a considerable operational component with any new endeavor and I’m really excited about that right now—it’s what gets me going in the morning! For example, how can we enhance traditional partnership development practices using generative AI? What new insights can we draw by digging into our existing data with an organizational lens? etc.

    Q2: Knowing you for a good number of years now, I know that you’ve worked hard to develop as an academic innovation leader. What was it about this particular role at U-M that inspired you to make this big professional (and personal) move?

    A: The University of Michigan’s Center for Academic Innovation (CAI) has earned a reputation as a national leader in shaping the future of lifelong learning. I could not imagine a better place to take this next step in my career. I feel grateful to have the support of my family and friends—they have been an invaluable source of encouragement and have been almost as excited as I am about the move! From the beginning of the interview process, I could tell that my new colleagues at CAI take organizational culture seriously and, as I have been onboarding, the CAI team has gone out of their way to extend a warm welcome, offering concrete guidance to help me succeed and just being incredibly helpful as I navigate the move to Ann Arbor.     

    I’ve always relished the challenges of sharpening an impactful idea, taking it from conception to development and experimentation to scale and sustainability. As I’ve settled into this role, I have found that CAI “on the inside” matches the external image I had formed before I joined the organization. I’m impressed by the strong leadership vision and strategic mindset of my colleagues on the Center’s senior leadership team as well as the interest in ideation and experimentation, the deep expertise and operational excellence at every level on the various teams that make up the Center.

    Creating the CESO role came from a clear commitment to an idea that has taken root at many U.S. universities in the past several years: that higher education institutions should serve not just degree-seeking students but also workforce development demands of our regions and talent development needs of external organizations more broadly. Trouble is, universities tend to be decentralized, and it can be a struggle to coordinate across different units with overlapping missions. So, when it comes time to execute on this vision, success may occur in pockets, but scaled solutions can hover out of reach. I was energized by the opportunity to step into the CESO role at CAI, where scale and global reach are part of our core value proposition.

    Q3: What career advice do you have for other non-faculty educators interested in growing into a leadership role? What skills, experiences and networks have been most valuable to you across your higher education career?

    A: We already talked about the importance of mentors and sponsors in our last conversation, so I won’t repeat myself on that topic. Another important lesson is to tend your network. I know the term “networking” often carries a transactional connotation that can be off-putting to mission-driven folks who value community. But in fact, I think of the network of academic innovators I’ve been lucky enough to work with as a community or web, where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Here are a few strategies I’ve found helpful when investing in that network:

    • Is there a former colleague you’ve fallen out of touch with? Set a monthly or quarterly reminder to reach out to three people you’ve worked with in the past (holidays are a great opportunity to reach out and let someone know you’re thinking of them!). Share an article or a joke that reminded you of them, ask for their help in a small way and offer your help in return, ask about something important in their lives, or just let them know you thought of them.
    • Cross-functional committees or cross-institutional organizations or conferences can be a great way to meet people and hear perspectives you wouldn’t ordinarily encounter. Sometimes, a few people discover a mutual interest and want to continue the conversation outside the committee or conference. Can you make a move that will help make this happen? Maybe you offer to compile email addresses of those who’d like to continue the conversation, maybe you’re even willing to organize a few virtual meetings so the group can come together. These types of small but visible investments will be valued by your peers and help you build your network.

    This year, two of my most treasured academic innovation colleagues passed away suddenly. They were two of the people I would call on to help me sharpen an idea, to offer support when I was feeling discouraged, or to share in the excitement of a successful experiment. I miss them every day, and it reminds me about the importance of community, not just for learners but for learning innovators. So I guess my best career advice today is, keep nurturing your network.

    Source link

  • Colleges Don’t “Over-Accommodate” Disabilities (opinion)

    Colleges Don’t “Over-Accommodate” Disabilities (opinion)

    In the current climate, one might question whether academic accommodations are the most urgent avenue for discourse. Yet a pattern of uncontested opinion pieces in spaces like The Atlantic (the newly published “Accommodation Nation”), The Chronicle of Higher Education (“Are Colleges Getting Disability Accommodations All Wrong?), The Wall Street Journal (“Colleges Bend the Rules for More Students, Give Them Extra Help”) and, indeed, Inside Higher Ed itself (“How Accommodating Can (Should) I Be?”) speaks to the enduring cultural conflict around how the Americans With Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act are actualized in higher education.

    As members of the executive board of the Association on Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD) in Virginia—a professional organization for staff of disability service offices—It is our intention to define and defuse the recurring arguments of this specific “type” of opinion article, which for convenience we will call the “Do Colleges Over-Accommodate?” piece.

    Setting the Table With Statistics

    It is common to see these claims begin from an assumption that disability accommodations “are skyrocketing”—a claim that sensationalizes statistics. One author cites the large volume of accommodation letters sent by a university per semester. Such a claim is rooted in either misunderstanding or deliberate misrepresentation of accommodations. At any institution, the total count of all accommodation letters sent appears disproportionately large, because each student is enrolled in multiple courses.

    A better accounting would come from data on the representation of disabled students within the institution. Recent National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) data shows that among public, 4-year institutions, 10.1 percent of them report that students with disabilities make up 10 percent or more of their student population. This is an increase from the 1.5 percent of institutions in 2010–2011, but why is it shocking that disabled students also want to go to universities that their nondisabled peers attend?

    The NCES data do suggest that disabled students are more likely to enroll in private institutions (more than 23 percent of private nonprofit colleges report that students with disabilities make up 10 percent or more of their student population). While this is supportive of a claim that students from privileged backgrounds have higher access to accommodations (and indeed, research supports this) it is telling that authors who put elite institutions in the spotlight are more focused on reducing accommodations available to these students than on increasing the support available to students at less elite institutions.

    It is also important to view these figures in the context of the post-ADA era. The ADA is only 35 years old, and its amendments passed in 2008. Today’s students come from an environment where they are more likely to expect accessibility, which is reflected in these “skyrocketing”—or “breathtaking”—numbers.

    Categorizing the Case Against Accommodations

    In our review of the “Do Colleges Over-Accommodate” archetype, we saw a clear pattern of essential recurring arguments:

    1. Academic accommodations unfairly advantage disabled students.
    2. Disabled students “game the system.”
    3. More rigid documentation standards are needed to “create equity.”

    In these arguments, we see unfortunate parallels to other attacks on civil rights playing out in our public discourse. Each individual claim requires a full-throated counterargument—which we will provide below.

    Claim: Accommodations Convey Advantage

    This is the most prevalent claim within these articles, and we will spend the greatest effort defusing it. This claim suggests that all accommodations create advantages for students with disabilities—that we should fear for “fairness,” or that accommodations will compromise rigor. In this piece, the author asserts that additional testing time for students with disabilities “is as unfair to other students as a head start would be to other runners.”

    This metaphor reveals a flawed assumption—that education is inherently a place of competition, with a fixed number of winners and losers. A zero-sum game. But universities are not limited in their capacity to provide degrees, nor is there a fixed number of A’s available.

    Still, there is value in ensuring fairness. Disability services officers (DSOs) develop rigorous criteria for assessing and analyzing cases where academic accommodations would “fundamentally alter” key aspects of courses. DSOs also seek to apply a measured approach to approval of accommodations, consistent with professional guidance. The purpose of accommodations—to return to the metaphor—is ensuring that students run in the same race.

    Research such as this 2022 U.K.-based study, which found that accommodations in most cases “worked as intended and helped [with] leveling the playing field,” challenges this narrative further.

    The work of DSOs relies on an interactive process at the individual level. A student who is dyslexic may benefit from a dictation tool for writing essays in a way that another would not. A student who has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder may benefit from a quiet testing environment—but not all students with the same diagnosis would have the same needs. The individualized identification and selection of supports to address disability-specific barriers is the cornerstone of DSO work, and it is work that our offices conduct effectively.

    Claim: Disabled Students ‘Game the System’

    Running through these articles is an implicit—at times explicit—assumption that DSOs are either tricked by students and their medical providers into approving accommodations inappropriately, or that students deliberately misuse even appropriate accommodations. Implicitly, this assumption is communicated to readers through less-than-subtle reliance on words like “claim” for how students communicate their disability, rather than “disclose.” Explicitly, this line of argument appeals to scholarship debating the ways in which individual disabilities are defined.

    Some of the most-cited sources in support of this claim are of questionable reliability. For example, this article from the Canadian Journal Psychological Injury and Law has been held as “sobering” evidence that DSOs are insufficiently rigorous in approving accommodations. In the study, researchers asked DSO staff if they would accommodate a fictitious prospective student based solely on what the researchers deemed insufficient documentation.

    Setting aside gaps in context between Canada and the U.S., what a DSO professional would hypothetically do and what they would do when presented with a live student are different. Our professional guidelines encourage the use of self-report, triangulated with other forms of information. Without following a student through the interactive process, the authors project bias and incorrect assumptions onto the work of DSO professionals—just as asking a doctor to suggest treatment without an exam would likely produce similarly “sobering” results.

    Claim: Rigid Documentation Requirements Create Equity

    The inaccuracy of this claim is likely to be apparent to anyone involved in accommodations review. Moreover, some of the sources cited by proponents of this claim directly contradict it. For example, Ashley Yull’s 2015 article about the intersection of race class, and disability notes:

    “Premising access to accommodations in post-secondary education on receipt of a psychiatric diagnosis magnifies the negative impact of childhood poverty.”

    And Bea Waterfield and Emma Whelan observed in their 2017 article:

    “SES [socioeconomic status] contributes to the experience of disadvantage for learning disabled students when they lack the financial means to obtain required diagnoses.”

    It is no wonder that scholars would dispute that documentation is a lever for equity, given the staggering cost of psychological assessments. There is variance in the pricing of these assessments, but in some areas they can cost between $1,000 and $5,000. While some university-operated assessment centers can be less costly, they typically have very long waiting lists. Meanwhile, 1 in 5 dependent undergraduate students come from families below the poverty line—and nearly half of independent students (those without financial support from family) met this criterion.

    Financial cost is not the only barrier to accessing rigorous documentation. Mental health providers experience significant demand, stretching wait times and disproportionately impacting rural and marginalized communities.

    If DSOs demanded that each student claiming a learning disability or ADHD diagnosis supply such a document, accommodations would be unavailable to poorer students and to many students from rural areas. For all students, the provision of accommodations would be delayed. This is why those working as DSOs are often so willing to work with students when they can articulate an access barrier. To claim otherwise can be understood as either a statement of ignorance about disability services or, perhaps, as reflective of a desire for accommodation requests to diminish.

    Conclusion

    As we noted, our goal is to present a measured response to these opinion essays. Having done so, we will do our readers the service of stating our own view:

    • Disability services professionals are thoughtful and effective in discharging their responsibilities in the interactive process.
    • Disabled students belong on college campuses, and accommodations serve to enable access to higher education.
    • Accommodations level the playing field for students within environments that were built without considering their very existence.
    • Rigidity in the interactive process burdens the student, and these burdens disproportionately impact marginalized communities.

    We encourage readers to draw their own conclusions—however, in doing so, we encourage you to listen to the voices of the disabled community, disability services professionals, and those with stakes and experience in navigating the accommodations process.

    In the current climate, where we are asked to consider whether empathy might be a sin, and whether disability might be incongruent with merit in the workplace, it is important to uplift these voices. It is important to stand firm in the knowledge of the expertise and value of those in helping professions. It is important to affirm that all means all, and that includes students with disabilities.

    Chris Parthemos and Martina Svyantek are the president-elect and president, respectively, of the Association on Higher Education and Disability in Virginia.

    Source link

  • Sick of Doomscrolling? Join This New Research Paper Collective Instead

    Sick of Doomscrolling? Join This New Research Paper Collective Instead

    Anuja Uppuluri used to spend a lot of time scrolling social media apps dictated by algorithms designed to keep users glued to their screens no matter how mind-numbing the content.

    “I always had something else that I could be doing or wanted to be doing, but I was choosing to watch TikTok videos for five hours,” said Uppuluri, who completed a bachelor’s degree in information systems at Carnegie Mellon University in May. “And then by the end of it I couldn’t remember anything that I had watched.”

    Uppuluri, who now works as a machine learning engineer for Anthropic, sought to become more intentional about the information she consumes and has since scaled back her social media usage. Rather than scroll aimlessly, she wanted to fill her time digesting more research related to her career field, especially about the inner workings and implications of increasingly prevalent generative artificial intelligence tools.

    She discovered all types of academic papers, articles and blog posts she wanted to read, but it wasn’t easy to keep organized. “I didn’t know where to put all of this stuff, because there’s no central location for it,” Uppuluri told Inside Higher Ed. “I started thinking about how I want to use my research and what I want to see from other people’s research.”

    So Uppuluri developed Paper Trails, which she described as “Goodreads for academic papers” in an X post announcing the website’s launch last week. “I built it because I wanted a place where engaging with research felt fun, beautiful, and personal to you.”

    Similar to the book-focused website Goodreads, Paper Trails is designed to help users discover new research and ideas, though it’s not powered by an AI algorithm. It’s a crowd-sourced platform where users can post links to papers from any field, peruse summaries of those papers, create shelves (public reading lists), and comment, review or rate papers.

    In the week since its public debut, Paper Trails has grown its users from 10 to 2,200; the number of articles available on the site has increased from 20 to 3,100.

    Inside Higher Ed spoke with Uppuluri to hear more about her vision for Paper Trails.

    (This interview has been edited for length and clarity.)

    Q: What sparked your interest in reading more academic research, especially about computer science and AI?

    A: I always thought of a computer scientist as someone who writes code, builds infrastructure and makes sure systems are built to scale. But AI is blurring the line between research and engineering. Every new discovery that comes out of a large language model (LLM) lab is research-oriented.

    Understanding why the technology is the way it is can be done by reading papers and understanding the research about large language models. These models are like black boxes—you can’t entirely understand what’s going on inside it—and that’s created all of the research subfields. For example, a subfield called interpretability is about trying to interpret what the models are doing. The more you do with these models, the more you have to read to understand how they work to gain context on how to build things better.

    Q: How did your previous experiences reading and writing research papers inform the creation of Paper Trails?

    A: A research paper to me used to mean something related to medicine, chemistry or biology. I didn’t understand or realize that it had a place in computer science until a few months before I wrote the only research paper I did in college. For that paper, I wrote the methodology and code, but my co-author, who was doing his Ph.D., helped me structure the paper, write the references and get it through the formatting process. It felt like a high barrier to entry for doing and reading research, which I associated with work instead of fun.

    I thought having some type of casual thing like [Paper Trails] to organize research papers would maybe help me read more. But other existing websites I experimented with looked so dated and used software I had to learn. It looked complicated and didn’t seem fun. I also didn’t want to organize my research in a big Google Doc that has 50 links on it that I’m never going to touch again—that looks ugly.

    So, I knew I could probably make my own site that looks nice and is easy to use.

    At its core, Paper Trails is a tool to put papers and other reading material together in a way that’s pretty and fun. Sometimes that’s what you need to make something feel more like a hobby rather than more work you have to do.

    Q: What went into developing the Paper Trails website and how does it work?

    A: I coded most of it from scratch, with the exception of pasting in a few codes to fix some bugs.

    When I first launched, there were only around 20 papers on the site. Now, there’s around 3,000 just from more people being on the site and adding the things that they want to read.

    I chose not to mass import a bunch of stuff at the outset because if people look at it and it’s not something they’re interested in, it’s still there. It’s kind of cool to look at every single paper and know that it’s there because it’s something on someone else’s reading list.

    Everything on the main page is organized by publication date. You can also use keywords to search or just click some buttons to see what people are logging. There is no personalized algorithm for users. While there isn’t anything necessarily wrong with a recommendation assistant, it’s also nice when there’s nothing telling you what to look at.

    Q: What is the value of Paper Trails for its users?

    A: There’s a lot of people who would like to get into research or just reading more. And if you want to spend your time in that way, having a tool to help you do it and encourage you to do makes it a lot easier to follow through on.

    There’s also value coming from all the people that make it a collaborative thing. It allows people to explore, kind of like going down a Wikipedia rabbit hole. You can just keep clicking on random links and reading. You don’t know what you’re going to learn at the start of your session but, if you’re interested in it, you can read it.

    Q: Now that people are showing interest, what are the next steps for Paper Trails?

    A: I was thinking about sending it to some of my old professors, especially if they have Ph.D. students who may be interested in working on it.

    There are even more elements that I could add that would improve the user experience. A lot of people have papers that are already saved on another site, so being able to bulk import would be helpful. Or allowing a few people to edit a shelf rather than just one person could make collaboration a little bit better. Or being able to clone somebody’s shelf so that another user can add some of their own stuff to it.

    I don’t know exactly what growth looks like. But to me, success means the people using it are happy.

    Source link

  • Education Dept. $15M Fund to Support Talent Marketplaces

    Education Dept. $15M Fund to Support Talent Marketplaces

    The statewide talent marketplaces should include credential registries, learning and employment records, and skills-based job description generators.

    ATHVisions/E+/Getty Images

    The Department of Education launched a new $15 million grant competition to promote the development of what it calls statewide “Talent Marketplaces,” or digital systems that track the credentials, employment records and skills of students and graduates.

    “Talent Marketplaces give learners, earners, and employers a clearer way to validate skills, opening doors to stackable credentials and stronger recognition of prior learning and work experience,” Nick Moore, the acting assistant secretary for the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education said in a Friday news release about the program. “As we expand these systems, we open more pathways into good jobs, support broader participation in the workforce, and help strengthen our Nation’s economy.”

    The announcement came just days after the House Education and Workforce Committee held a hearing about expanding access to similar Learning and Employment Records. The goal, according to Republicans in both Congress and the Education Department, is to help institutions better match talent to opportunity and expand access to career pathways with a positive return on investment.

    In this first competition, the department will identify up to 10 award winners, each of whom will receive a portion of the $15 million as well as technical assistance in refining and implementing their development plans. It is unclear based on the news release where the funding for this program will come from.

    The application will open in January, according to the release.

    Source link

  • College Park President Cleared of Plagiarism Claims

    College Park President Cleared of Plagiarism Claims

    An investigation cleared Pines of academic misconduct.

    University of Maryland, College Park

    University of Maryland College Park President Darryll Pines did not commit academic misconduct, an investigation determined, clearing him of plagiarism allegations that emerged last September.

    A joint investigation that involved both the campus and the University System of Maryland but was led by an outside law firm “found no evidence of misconduct on the part of President Pines,” according to an emailed announcement from College Park and system officials sent on Friday.

    Last fall, Pines was accused of lifting 1,500 words from a tutorial website for a 5,000-word paper that he co-authored in 2002, and of later reusing that same text for a 2006 publication, according to the initial allegations against him that first broke in The Daily Wire, a conservative website.

    Pines disputed the claims from the start, stating that they had no merit.

    However, Joshua Altmann, who wrote the text that Pines was accused of lifting, told Inside Higher Ed last year that “I do consider it to be plagiarism, and not worthy of an academic.”

    The investigation, which concluded after more than a year, included three rounds of external reviews and was extended to other articles Pines wrote. While it found no evidence of misconduct, investigators noted attribution errors in some works.

    “The committee did determine that the two works highlighted last year contained select portions of text previously published by another author in the introductory sections. In a separate text, a discrepancy in assignment of authorship was made. However, President Pines was not found responsible for the inclusion of such text in any of the three works, nor was he found responsible for scholarly misconduct of any kind,” College Park and system officials announced last week.

    Officials also expressed confidence in Pines’s leadership going forward.

    Source link

  • Why every middle school student deserves a second chance to learn to read

    Why every middle school student deserves a second chance to learn to read

    Key points:

    Between kindergarten and second grade, much of the school day is dedicated to helping our youngest students master phonics, syllabication, and letter-sound correspondence–the essential building blocks to lifelong learning.

    Unfortunately, this foundational reading instruction has been stamped with an arbitrary expiration date. Students who miss that critical learning window, including our English Language Learners (ELL), children with learning disabilities, and those who find reading comprehension challenging, are pushed forward through middle and high school without the tools they need. In the race to catch up to classmates, they struggle academically, emotionally, and in extreme cases, eventually disengage or drop out.

    Thirteen-year-old Alma, for instance, was still learning the English language during those first three years of school. She grappled with literacy for years, watching her peers breeze through assignments while she stumbled over basic decoding. However, by participating in a phonetics-first foundational literacy program in sixth grade, she is now reading at grade level.

    “I am more comfortable when I read,” she shared. “And can I speak more fluently.”

    Alma’s words represent a transformation that American education typically says is impossible after second grade–that every child can become a successful reader if given a second chance.

    Lifting up the learners left behind 

    At Southwestern Jefferson County Consolidated School in Hanover, Ind., I teach middle-school students like Alma who are learning English as their second language. Many spent their formative school years building oral language proficiency and, as a result, lost out on systematic instruction grounded in English phonics patterns. 

    These bright and ambitious students lack basic foundational skills, but are expected to keep up with their classmates. To help ELL students access the same rigorous content as their peers while simultaneously building the decoding skills they missed, we had to give them a do-over without dragging them a step back. 

    Last year, we introduced our students to Readable English, a research-backed phonetic system that makes English decoding visible and teachable at any age. The platform embeds foundational language instruction into grade-level content, including the textbooks, novels, and worksheets all students are using, but with phonetic scaffolding that makes decoding explicit and systematic.

    To help my students unlock the code behind complicated English language rules, we centered our classroom intervention on three core components:

    • Rhyming: The ability to rhyme, typically mastered by age five, is a key early literacy indicator. However, almost every ELL student in my class was missing this vital skill. Changing even one letter can alter the sound of a word, and homographic words like “tear” have completely different sounds and meanings. By embedding a pronunciation guide into classroom content, glyphs–or visual diacritical marks–indicate irregular sounds in common words and provide key information about the sound a particular letter makes.
    • Syllabication patterns: Because our ELL students were busy learning conversational English during the critical K-2 years, systematic syllable division, an essential decoding strategy, was never practiced. Through the platform, visual syllable breaks organize words into simple, readable chunks that make patterns explicit and teachable.
    • Silent letter patterns: With our new phonics platform, students can quickly “hear” different sounds. Unmarked letters make their usual sound while grayed-out letters indicate those with a silent sound. For students frustrated with pronunciation, pulling back the curtain on language rules provided them with that “a-ha” moment.

    The impact on our students’ reading proficiency has been immediate and measurable, creating a cognitive energy shift from decoding to comprehension. Eleven-year-old Rodrigo, who has been in the U.S. for only two years, reports he’s “better at my other classes now” and is seeing boosts in his science, social studies, and math grades.

    Taking a new step on a nationwide level

    The middle-school reading crisis in the U.S. is devastating for our students. One-third of eighth-graders failed to hit the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) benchmark in reading, the largest percentage ever. In addition, students who fail to build literacy skills exhibit lower levels of achievement and are more likely to drop out of school. 

    The state of Indiana has recognized the crisis and, this fall, launched a new reading initiative for middle-school students. While this effort is a celebrated first step, every school needs the right tools to make intervention a success, especially for our ELL students. 

    Educators can no longer expect students to access grade-level content without giving them grade-level decoding skills. Middle-school students need foundational literacy instruction that respects their age, cognitive development, and dignity. Revisiting primary-grade phonics curriculum isn’t the right answer–educators must empower kids with phonetic scaffolding embedded in the same content their classmates are learning. 

    To help all students excel and embrace a love of reading, it’s time to reject the idea that literacy instruction expires in second grade. Instead, all of us can provide every child, at any age, the chance to become a successful lifelong reader who finds joy in the written word.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link