Tag: Online
-
Organization of Educational Historians National Conference, September 26-27th Online
Save the date – September 26-27! As a non-profit educational organization, we hope you will join us at our annual conference! If you are looking for a conference that includes sharing histories of education to help define present processes and inform the development of future responses, we hope you will join us and attend our annual conference. This year’s conference will include at least one panel on aspects of how artificial intelligence will impact educational history, but there will be many other panels. While the final conference schedule is still in development, this poster features examples of previous topics at the annual conference, so we can’t guarantee sessions on all these topics yet, but they demonstrate our past conference topics and may be indicative of what will be in this year’s conference. Our conference being offered online ensures low cost as we seek to invite many scholars into the organization by keeping travel costs low – and a full year’s membership, complete with the journal and attendance at the conference, remains affordable with a student rate ($60) and a regular rate (non-student) ($120)! With a peer-reviewed journal, an annual conference attendance complete with a noted keynote speaker, and a membership, we are dedicated to ensuring as many people as are interested can attend our conference. As you look to the fall, save the date and register here to attend: http://www.edhistorians.org/annual-meeting.html -
K12 Earns High Marks for Excellence in Online Public Education
RESTON, Va.(GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — K12, a portfolio brand of Stride, Inc. has been recognized for its steadfast commitment to quality education. In a recent review by Cognia, a global nonprofit that accredits schools, K12 earned an impressive Index of Education Quality (IEQ) score of 327, well above the global average of 296. Cognia praised K12 for creating supportive environments where students are encouraged to learn and grow in ways that work best for them.
For over 25 years, K12 has been a pioneer in online public education, delivering flexible, high-quality learning experiences to families across the country. Having served more than 3 million students, K12 has helped shape the future of personalized learning. This long-standing presence in the field reflects a deep understanding of what families need from a modern education partner. The recent Cognia review further validates K12’s role as a trusted provider, recognizing the strength of its learning environments and its commitment to serving all students.
“What stood out in this review is how clearly our learning environments are working for students,” said Niyoka McCoy, Chief Learning Officer at Stride, Inc. “From personalized graduation plans to real-time feedback tools and expanded course options, the Cognia team saw what we see every day, which is students being supported in ways that help them grow, stay engaged, and take ownership of their learning.”
K12’s impact extends well beyond the virtual classroom. In 2025, the organization was honored with two Gold Stevie® Awards for Innovation in Education and recognized at the Digital Education Awards for its excellence in digital learning. These awards highlight K12’s continued leadership in delivering meaningful, future-focused education. What sets K12-powered online public schools apart is a curriculum that goes beyond the basics, offering students access to STEM, Advanced Placement, dual-credit, industry certifications, and gamified learning experiences. K12’s program is designed to spark curiosity, build confidence, and help students thrive in college, careers, and life.
Through student-centered instruction and personalized support, K12 is leading the way in modern education. As the learning landscape evolves, K12 adapts alongside it, meeting the needs of today’s students while shaping the future of education.
To learn more about K12 and its accredited programs, visit k12.com.
About Stride, Inc.
Stride Inc. (LRN) is redefining lifelong learning with innovative, high-quality education solutions. Serving learners in primary, secondary, and postsecondary settings, Stride provides a wide range of services including K-12 education, career learning, professional skills training, and talent development. Stride reaches learners in all 50 states and over 100 countries. Learn more at Stridelearning.com.
Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all) -
Supreme Court case upholding age-verification for online adult content newly references ‘partially protected speech,’ gives it lesser First Amendment scrutiny
In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the U.S. Supreme Court broke new ground in applying relaxed First Amendment scrutiny to state-imposed burdens on lawful adult access to obscene-for-minors content. The decision appeared outcome-driven to uphold laws that require websites with specified amounts of sexually explicit material to verify users’ ages. However, the Court indicated the holding applies only “to the extent the State seeks only to verify age,” such that, if handled in a principled manner, FSC v. Paxton should have relevance only for speech to which minors’ access may be constitutionally restricted.
FSC v. Paxton involved Texas HB 1181’s mandate that online services use “reasonable age verification methods” to ensure those granted access are adults if more than a third of the site’s content is “sexual material harmful to minors,” which the Court treated as content First Amendment law defines as “obscene for minors.” If an adult site knowingly fails to age-verify, Texas’ attorney general may recover civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day, and $250,000 if a minor actually accesses pornographic content. HB 1811 is one of over 20 state adult-content age-verification laws recently passed or enacted.
Obscenity is among the few categories of speech the First Amendment doesn’t protect. In 1973’s Miller v. California, the Court defined obscenity as speech that (1) taken as a whole appeals primarily to a “prurient interest” in sex (i.e., morbid, unhealthy fixation with it); (2) depicts or describes sexual or excretory conduct in ways patently offensive under contemporary community standards; and (3) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The Court has limited the test’s scope to what it calls “hardcore pornography.” Material that is “obscene for minors” is that which satisfies the Miller test as adjusted to minors. Sexually explicit material can thus be obscene for minors but fully protected for adults.
Under these tests, the government may ban obscene speech and restrict access by those under 18 to speech that is “obscene for minors,” but it cannot cut off adults’ access to non-obscene sexual material.
It’s long been accepted that, to access adult, potentially obscene-for-minors material in the physical world, showing identification to prove age may be required. So, a law requiring ID to access such content online might seem analogous on its face.
But online age-verification imposes risks physical ID checks do not. An adult bookstore clerk doesn’t save a photocopy of your license or track the content you access. Nor will hackers, therefore, try to access the ID. These are just some of the reasons surveys consistently show a majority of Americans do not want to provide ID to access online speech — whether adult material or other content, like social media.
Texas’ HB 1181 is similar to two federal statutes the Supreme Court invalidated around the turn of the millennium. In 1997, the Court in Reno v. ACLU unanimously struck down portions of the Communications Decency Act that criminalized transmitting “obscene or indecent” content. And in 2002’s Ashcroft v. ACLU, it considered whether the Child Online Protection Act violated the First Amendment in seeking to prevent children’s access to “material harmful to minors” in a way that incorporated age verification.
For decades, the Court has held statutes that regulate speech based on its content must withstand judicial review under strict scrutiny, which requires the government to demonstrate that the law is necessary to serve a compelling government interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve it using the “least restrictive means.” For laws restricting access to online speech, the Court held the laws in Reno and Ashcroft unconstitutional because they failed strict scrutiny. These cases followed in the footsteps of Sable Communications vs. FCC (1989) and United States v. Playboy (2000), in which the Court applied strict scrutiny to invalidate laws governing adult material transmitted by phone and on cable television stations, respectively.
But in FSC v. Paxton, the Court subjected Texas’ age-verification law for online adult content to only intermediate scrutiny. Under this standard of review, a speech regulation survives if it addresses an important government interest unrelated to suppression of speech, directly advances that interest in a direct and material way, and does not burden substantially more speech than necessary. The Court justified applying a lower level of scrutiny on the ground that minors have no First Amendment right to access speech that is obscene to them. Accordingly, it reasoned, even if adults have the right to access “obscene for minors” material, it is “not fully protected speech.” From there, the Court concluded that “no person — adult or child — has a First Amendment right to access speech that is obscene to minors without first submitting proof of age.” And it upheld the Texas law under intermediate scrutiny, concluding the regulations only incidentally restrict speech that can be accessed by adults.
The upshot is, going forward, it will be easier to justify laws restricting minors’ access to off-limits expression even if the law burdens adults’ access to material that is otherwise lawful for them.
At the same time, the majority opinion sought to limit the type of content that can be restricted only to material that meets the legal definition of “obscene-for-minors” material, and not anything that might be considered generally inappropriate.
As the Court held in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn. (2011), “minors are entitled to a significant measure of First Amendment protection, and only in relatively narrow and well-defined circumstances may government bar public dissemination of protected materials to them.” And in Reno, which involved similar attempts to limit provision of online content to minors, the Court held the government could not ban “patently offensive” and “indecent” (but not obscene) material for everyone in the name of protecting children.
Free Speech Coalition should not be read as approving age verification laws for online speech generally that do not specifically target “obscene for minors” material. Its narrow focus will not support the recent spate of social media age-verification laws that have met significant judicial disapproval. Such laws have been enjoined in Arkansas, Mississippi, California, Utah, Texas, Ohio, Indiana, Florida, and most recently last week, when a federal court held Georgia’s version “highly likely [to] be unconstitutional” because it interferes with minors’ rights “to engage in protected speech activities.”
Thus, properly understood, FSC v. Paxton should have limited implications — including that it shouldn’t extend to general age-verification laws in the social media context.
The risk, of course, is that governments will seek to leverage FSC v. Paxton decision beyond its limited holding, and/or that lower courts will misuse it, to justify prohibiting or regulating protected speech other than that obscene as to minors. In defending laws that implicate the First Amendment, the government often argues it is regulating only conduct, or unprotected speech, or speech “incidental” to criminal conduct.
Courts for the most part have seen through these attempts at evasion, and where a speech regulation applies based on topic discussed or idea or message expressed, or cannot be justified without reference to its function or content, courts apply strict scrutiny. Under FSC, however, would-be regulators have another label they can use — “partially protected speech” — and the hope that invoking it will lead to intermediate scrutiny.
Only time will tell if the Court will keep the starch in its First Amendment standards notwithstanding what should be the purple cow of FSC v. Paxton.
-
How Gimkit engages my students
Key points:
During the height of the COVID-19 outbreak, teachers needed to become resourceful in how they delivered content to students. During this time, students experienced significant change and evolved into a more technologically-dependent group.
This sparked a period when online learning and digital resources gained substantial popularity, and one tool that helps students learn–while also feeling like a game instead of a lesson–is Gimkit.
I am an 8th-grade science teacher in a fairly large district, and I recognize the importance of these engaging and interactive resources to help students build knowledge and continue learning.
What is Gimkit?
To begin with, what is Gimkit? According to a tutorial, “Gimkit is an excellent game-based learning platform that combines fun and education, making it a highly engaging tool for both teachers and students. It works like a mashup of Kahoot and flash card platforms, but with several unique features that set it apart.
“Unlike other platforms, Gimkit allows students to earn virtual currency for every correct answer, which they can use to purchase power-ups, adding a competitive edge that keeps students motivated.”
Gimkit offers so much more than just a game-based learning experience for students–it can be used as an introduction to a lesson, as assigned homework, or as a tool for reviewing.
Building a Gimkit
From the teacher’s side of Gimkit, the platform makes it extremely easy to build lessons for the students to use. When you go to create a lesson, you are given many different options to help with the construction.
Jamie Keet explains: “After establishing your basic Kit information, you will then move onto the fun part–adding your questions! You will be given the option of adding a question, creating your Kit with Flashcards, continuing with KitCollab, adding from Gimkit’s Question Bank, or importing from Spreadsheet.”
Adding your questions is a great way to make sure your students are getting the exact information they have been provided in class, but some of the other options can help with a teacher’s time, which always seems to be scarce.
The option to add questions from the question bank allows teachers to view other created kits similar to their topic. With a few simple clicks, a teacher can add questions that meet the needs of their lesson.
Gimkit as data collection
Gimkit isn’t just a tool for students to gain knowledge and play games; it is also an excellent way for teachers to collect data on their students. As Amelia Bree observes:
“Gimkit reports explained show you both big pictures and small details. The look might change sometimes. But you will usually see:
- Overall Class Performance: This shows the average right answers. It tells you the total questions answered. It also shows how long the game took. It’s a good first look at how everyone understood.
- Individual Student Results: Click on each student’s name here. You see their personal game path. Their accuracy. Which questions did they get right or wrong? Sometimes, even how fast they answered.
- Question Breakdown: This part is very powerful. It shows how everyone did on each question you asked. You see how many got it right. How many missed it? Sometimes, it shows common wrong answers for multiple-choice questions.”
Being able to see this data can help ensure that your students are not just completing the required steps to finish the task, but are also working towards mastering the materials within your class.
When examining the data, if you identify trends related to specific questions or concepts that students are struggling with, you have the opportunity to revisit and reteach these areas.
Conclusion
As you can see, Gimkit isn’t just a tool for students to play games and have fun in class; it is also an opportunity for students to gain knowledge in your lessons while potentially having some fun in the process. Teachers can make creating content for their classes much easier by utilizing some of the built-in features Gimkit provides.
They can collect the meaningful data needed to ensure students are making progress in the areas where they want them to.
Works Cited
Breisacher, J. (2024, October 7). How Teachers Can Use Gimkit in the Classroom (a tutorial). Student-Centered World. https://www.studentcenteredworld.com/gimkit/
Keet, J. (2021, July 9). How to Use Gimkit- Step By Step Guide. Teachers.Tech.
https://teachers.tech/how-to-use-gimkit/Bree, E. (2025, June 6). Unlock Data-Driven Teaching: Using Gimkit for Meaningful
Assessment Insights. GIMKIT JOIN.
https://gimkitjoin.net/gimkit-for-meaningful-assessment-insights/Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all) -
Older (Desperate) Folks Targeted for Online Robocolleges
In recent years, the profile of student loan borrowers in the United States has shifted dramatically. While student debt is often associated with young adults entering the workforce, a rapidly growing number of older Americans—those aged 50 and above—are carrying significant student loan balances, revealing a troubling new dimension of the nation’s student debt crisis.
As of mid-2025, approximately 7.8 million Americans aged 50 and older hold federal student loan debt, representing about 6% of adults in this age group. Many have borrowed not only for their own education but also to finance their children’s or grandchildren’s schooling. Others have returned to college later in life, seeking new skills or credentials to remain competitive. Yet, these borrowers often face unique challenges that have been exacerbated by the rise of so-called “robocolleges.”
Robocolleges are online institutions that aggressively market to older adults, promising flexible schedules and quick credentials that can lead to better job prospects. However, many of these institutions have come under scrutiny for their low graduation rates, high tuition costs, and poor outcomes for students. Unlike traditional colleges, robocolleges often rely heavily on automated systems and minimal personal support, leaving vulnerable older learners with little guidance about loan obligations or realistic career prospects.
These institutions have played a significant role in trapping many older Americans in unsustainable debt. Borrowers are lured by the promise of upward mobility but frequently end up with degrees that hold limited value in the labor market. The high cost of attendance combined with aggressive recruitment tactics has led many to accumulate tens of thousands of dollars in student loan debt with few prospects for repayment.
Among older borrowers—6.2 million between 50 and 61 years old, and 2.8 million aged 62 or older—the average federal student loan balance for the 50–61 cohort is around $47,000, the highest among all age groups. Around 8% are delinquent on their loans, with median delinquent balances near $11,500. For those over 62, approximately 452,000 are in default and face the threat of Social Security benefit garnishment, though recent government actions have temporarily paused such garnishments.
The debt explosion among older Americans has been dramatic: over the past two decades, the number of borrowers aged 60 and above has increased sixfold, with total debt rising nearly twentyfold. Robocolleges, with their predatory recruitment and inadequate educational outcomes, are a central piece of this puzzle, helping to drive up borrowing without delivering commensurate value.
This growing crisis underscores the urgent need for policy reforms tailored to the realities faced by older borrowers. There must be greater transparency and accountability from robocolleges, stronger consumer protections, and expanded debt relief options that reflect the challenges of late-in-life borrowing. Additionally, educational counseling and financial literacy support designed specifically for older students are crucial.
The student debt crisis in America is no longer only about young adults trying to start their careers—it increasingly jeopardizes the financial security and dignity of older generations. As robocolleges continue to trap vulnerable older learners in cycles of debt, the urgency for reform becomes even clearer.
The Higher Education Inquirer will continue to investigate and report on this evolving crisis, amplifying the voices of those caught in the crosshairs of an expanding student debt epidemic.
-
Many students decide they’re not a ‘math person’ by the end of elementary school, new study shows
This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.
Roughly half of middle and high schoolers report losing interest in math class at least half the time, and 1 in 10 lack interest nearly all the time during class, a new study shows.
In addition, the students who felt the most disengaged in math class said they wanted fewer online activities and more real-world applications in their math classes.
Those and other findings published Tuesday from the research corporation RAND highlight several ongoing challenges for instruction in math, where nationwide student achievement has yet to return to pre-pandemic levels and the gap between the highest and lowest-performing students in math has continued to grow.
Feeling bored in math class from time to time is not an unusual experience, and feeling “math anxiety” is common. However, the RAND study notes that routine boredom is associated with lower school performance, reduced motivation, reduced effort, and increased rates of dropping out of school.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the study found that the students who are the most likely to maintain their interest in math comprehend math, feel supported in math, are confident in their ability to do well in math, enjoy math, believe in the need to learn math, and see themselves as a “math person.”
Dr. Heather Schwartz, a RAND researcher and the primary investigator of the study, noted that the middle and high school years are when students end up on advanced or regular math tracks. Schwartz said that for young students determining their own sense of math ability, “Tracking programs can be a form of external messaging.”
Nearly all the students who said they identified as a “math person” came to that conclusion before they reached high school, the RAND survey results show. A majority of those students identified that way as early as elementary school. In contrast, nearly a third of students surveyed said they never identified that way.
“Math ability is malleable way past middle school,” Schwartz said. Yet, she noted that the survey indicates students’ perception of their own capabilities often remains static.
The RAND study drew on data from their newly established American Youth Panel, a nationally representative survey of students ages 12-21. It used survey responses of 434 students in grades 5-12. Because this was the first survey sent to members of the panel, there is no comparable data on student math interest prior to the pandemic, so it doesn’t measure any change in student interest.
The RAND study found that 26% percent of students in middle and high school reported losing interest during a majority of their math lessons. On the other end of the spectrum, a quarter of students said they never or almost never lost interest in math class.
There weren’t major differences in the findings across key demographic groups: Students in middle and high school, boys and girls, and students of different races and ethnicities reported feeling bored during a majority of math class at similar rates.
Dr. Janine Remillard, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education and expert in mathematics curriculum, said that in many math classes, “It’s usually four or five students answering all the questions, and then the kids who either don’t understand or are less interested or just take a little bit more time — they just zone out.”
Over 50% of students who lost interest in almost all of their math classes asked for fewer online activities and more real-world problems, the RAND study shows. Schwartz hypothesizes that some online math programs represent a “modern worksheet” and emphasize solo work and repetition. Students who are bored in class instead crave face-to-face activities that focus on application, she said.
During Remillard’s math teacher training classes, she puts students in her math teacher training class into groups to solve math problems. But she doesn’t tell them what strategy to use.
The students are forced to work together in order to understand the process of finding an answer rather than simply repeating a given formula. All of her students typically say that if they had learned math this way, they would think of themselves as a math person, according to Remillard, who was not involved in the RAND study.
Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.
For more news on STEM learning, visit eSN’s STEM & STEAM hub.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all) -
Higher Education Inquirer : Liberty University Online: Master’s Degree Debt Factory
Liberty University, one of the largest Christian universities in the United States, has built an educational empire by promoting conservative values and offering flexible online degree programs to hundreds of thousands of students. But behind the pious branding and patriotic marketing lies a troubling pattern: Liberty University Online has become a master’s degree debt factory, churning out credentials of questionable value while generating billions in student loan debt.
From Moral Majority to Mass Marketing
Founded in 1971 by televangelist Jerry Falwell Sr., Liberty University was created to train “Champions for Christ.” In the 2000s, the school found new life through online education, transforming from a small evangelical college into a mega-university with nearly 95,000 online students, the vast majority of them enrolled in nontraditional and graduate programs.
By leveraging aggressive digital marketing, religious appeals, and promises of career advancement, Liberty has positioned itself as a go-to destination for working adults and military veterans seeking master’s degrees. But this rapid expansion has not come without costs — especially for the students who enroll.
A For-Profit Model in Nonprofit Clothing
Though technically a nonprofit, Liberty University operates with many of the same profit-driven incentives as for-profit colleges. Its online programs generate massive revenues — an estimated $1 billion annually — thanks in large part to federal student aid programs. Students are encouraged to take on loans to pay for master’s degrees in education, counseling, business, and theology, among other fields. Many of these programs are offered in accelerated formats that cater to working adults but often lack the rigor, support, or job placement outcomes associated with traditional graduate schools.
Federal data shows that many Liberty students, especially graduate students, take on substantial debt. According to the U.S. Department of Education’s College Scorecard, the median graduate student debt at Liberty can range from $40,000 to more than $70,000, depending on the program. Meanwhile, the return on investment is often dubious, with low median earnings and high rates of student loan forbearance or default.
Exploiting Faith and Patriotism
Liberty’s marketing strategy is finely tuned to appeal to Christian conservatives, homeschoolers, veterans, and working parents. By framing education as a moral and patriotic duty, Liberty convinces students that enrolling in an online master’s program is both a personal and spiritual investment. Testimonials of “calling” and “purpose” are common, but the financial realities can be harsh.
Many students report feeling misled by promises of job readiness or licensure, especially in education and counseling fields, where state licensing requirements can differ dramatically from what Liberty prepares students for. Others cite inadequate academic support and difficulties transferring credits.
The university spends heavily on recruitment and retention, often at the expense of student services and academic quality.
Lack of Oversight and Accountability
Liberty University benefits from minimal federal scrutiny compared to for-profit schools, largely because of its nonprofit status and political connections. The institution maintains close ties to conservative lawmakers and was a vocal supporter of the Trump administration, which rolled back regulations on higher education accountability.
Despite a series of internal scandals — including financial mismanagement, sexual misconduct cover-ups, and leadership instability following the resignation of Jerry Falwell Jr. — Liberty has continued to expand its online presence. Its graduate programs, particularly in education and counseling, remain cash cows that draw in federal loan dollars with few checks on student outcomes.
A Cautionary Tale in Christian Capitalism
The story of Liberty University Online is not just about one school. It reflects a broader trend in American higher education: the merging of religion, capitalism, and credential inflation. As more employers demand advanced degrees for mid-level jobs, and as traditional institutions struggle to adapt, schools like Liberty have seized the opportunity to market hope — even if it comes at a high cost.
For students of faith seeking upward mobility, Liberty promises a path to both spiritual and professional fulfillment. But for many, the result is a diploma accompanied by tens of thousands in debt and limited economic return. The moral reckoning may not be just for Liberty University, but for the policymakers and accreditors who continue to enable this lucrative cycle of debt and disillusionment.
The Higher Education Inquirer will continue to investigate Liberty University Online and similar institutions as part of our ongoing series on higher education debt, inequality, and regulatory failure.
-
University of Memphis Global — an Online Path to a Better Future
I’ll be the first in my family to earn a college degree, and that’s something I hold very close to my heart.
My family and I moved to the United States in 2014. We chose Memphis as our second home to start fresh and build a better future.
When I graduated high school in 2020, I decided to join the Army Reserve so I could work full-time to help support my family financially. Along the way, my parents always reminded me of the importance of a college degree. Honestly, I struggled with the decision between choosing work over school.
That changed when I discovered the University of Memphis Global (UofM Global) where I could earn my degree 100% online from an accredited, nationally recognized Carnegie R1 university. The flexibility of the program made it possible to balance work, life, and education. Once I enrolled, I knew I made the right choice.
As an online student, I stayed involved with campus life through career fairs and joining student organizations like the Society of Human Resource Management. I wanted to get the most out of my college experience and connect with people who shared my passion for HR.
Last November, I deployed to Kuwait, with a month left of fall semester. Thanks to the support and structure of UofM Global, I was able to finish strong, even making the Dean’s List. I’m taking four classes while serving on active duty, and I’m proud to say I’ll be graduating in May.
Being able to serve my country, support my family, and earn my degree means the world to me. I feel ready to take on whatever comes next.
To learn more, visit memphis.edu/uofmglobal/
-
ASU Online: Where Success Is Accessible and Innovation Is Standard
What is your passion? What sparks your curiosity and brings you joy? Whatever it is, Arizona State University (ASU) will help you find it, study it, master it, and turn it into a rewarding career, regardless of your previous educational journey.
Casey Evans
Chief Operating Officer, EdPlus at ASU
For more than 15 years, ASU has offered high-quality programs online taught by the same world-renowned faculty that teach on-campus students, using the same rigorous curriculum. ASU offers more than 300 degree programs online, with over 100,000 graduates now working across nearly every industry, helping to strengthen the university’s reputation for educational excellence and career readiness. ASU graduates are highly recruitable, with ASU ranking No. 2 in the United States among public universities for the employability of its graduates, ahead of UCLA, the University of Michigan, and Purdue University.
ASU Online combines the exceptional resources and academic excellence of the nation’s most innovative university with a rigorous, world-class online learning experience. Students are supported every step of the way, ensuring they gain the skills and knowledge they need to thrive in their career, no matter where they are in the world.
“ASU’s rigorous coursework and knowledgeable instructors have been instrumental in preparing me for my career, equipping me with the skills to excel in my field,” said Evelyn M., ’24 BS in speech and hearing science.
To learn more, visit asuonline.asu.edu