All rule-making sessions for the Department of Education were held online from the start of the COVID pandemic to the beginning of the second Trump administration.
Screenshot/Alexis Gravely
The Education Department’s current rule-making session, in which committee members are determining how to implement new student loan policies, will be delayed by two weeks if Congress fails to pass legislation to keep the government open, Trump officials announced Monday morning.
“There is the possibility—which seems to be growing by the hour—of a lapse in appropriations,” one department official said during the rule-making session’s commencement Monday. “Have no fear, however,” he added, “we do have a contingency plan for that.”
The official, Jeffrey Andrade, deputy assistant secretary for policy, planning and innovation, went on to explain that if the government does shut down Oct. 1, the remainder of the session would take place online from Oct. 15 to 17. (The plans were also posted to the Federal Register on Monday.)
Managing a virtual negotiated rule-making session, however, would be nothing new to the department staff, as all sessions prior to the start of the second Trump administration have been held online since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in 2020.
“Again, fingers crossed,” Andrade said. “But the oddsmakers, when I last checked, were in the high 60s in favor of them not passing a continuing resolution in time. So that’s a plan.”
The department was already facing a tight timeline to negotiate the various regulatory changes, and some are worried that the two-week delay could further complicate the effort.
“A government shutdown throws a wrench into the rule making,” said Clare McCann, managing director of policy for the Postsecondary Education and Economics Research Center at American University. “Even assuming a shutdown is over in two weeks, as the department hopes, almost all of the Education Department’s staff will be furloughed in the meantime and unable to continue working on the draft regulations. With such a crunched timeline for finishing the rules in the first place, this makes the department’s job much more challenging.”
If the government were to shut down, about 87 percent of the Education Department’s nearly 2,500 employees would be furloughed, according to the agency’s contingency plan. The department is planning to keep on employees who are working on the rule-making process and to carry out other provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was signed into law over the summer.
Student aid distributions will not be paused and loan payments will still be due, but the department will cease grant-making activities and pause civil rights investigations. Grantees, though, can still access funds awarded over the summer and before Sept. 30.
Nearly half of all students worldwide have engaged in online learning.
Online and hybrid education have shifted from emergency responses during the COVID-19 pandemic to permanent, influential forces reshaping education from kindergarten to high school to higher education. Once seen as supplemental, these models play a central role in how students, families, and institutions approach learning, access, and opportunity.
Full online enrollment remains rare in grades K-12, with just 0.6% of U.S. public school students fully online. However, hybrid learning is widespread, with 63% of students using online tools daily (National Center for Education Statistics, 2023). Globally, nearly half of all students have engaged in online learning, fueling a K–12 online education market valued at more than 171 billion U.S. dollars (Devlin Peck, n.d.; Yellow Bus ABA, n.d.).
In higher education, the shift is even more pronounced. By 2023, over half of U.S. college students had taken at least one online course, and over one-quarter were enrolled exclusively online (National Center for Education Statistics, 2023; BestColleges, 2023). Adult learners and graduate students have been especially drawn to online programs, attracted by the flexibility and accessibility they offer (Arizton Advisory & Intelligence, 2023).
But the numbers alone do not tell the whole story. To understand the future of online and hybrid learning, we need to listen to families, not as bystanders, but as essential decision-makers, advocates, and partners in shaping students’ educational journeys.
What families and students think, and why it matters
Across education levels, families appreciate the flexibility of online and hybrid models but consistently voice concerns about academic rigor, social connection, and equitable access.
In K–12, parents generally prefer in-person schooling but want schools to improve the quality of online options (Barnum, 2020; Dong, Cao, & Li, 2020; Garbe, Ogurlu, Logan, & Cook, 2020). Adult and international students in higher education often rely on online programs to balance work and family demands. However, they face barriers such as isolation, inconsistent internet access, and limited interaction with peers and faculty (Kibelloh & Bao, 2014).
Research underscores that strong course design is essential for satisfaction and success (Babb, Stewart, & Johnson, 2010; Detyna & Koch, 2023) and that social connection is not a luxury but a critical factor in persistence and well-being (Tayebinik & Puteh, 2012). Equity gaps also loom large: students without access to reliable devices, broadband, or support networks face steeper challenges (Eduljee, Murphy, Emigh-Guy, & Croteau, 2023; Neece, McIntyre, & Fenning, 2020).
Families’ pandemic experiences reinforce these themes. Many described overwhelming stress and inequities that left them skeptical of online learning without stronger support and communication (Dong et al., 2020; Garbe et al., 2020; Neece et al., 2020).
Key findings: What families want, and what budget cuts threaten
1. Families are cautious about fully online. Only 11% said they would consider a fully online experience for their student. In contrast, about 60% were open to hybrid models, which they saw as the “best of both worlds,” combining affordability, flexibility, and connection.
2. First-generation families are more open. Nearly one in five said they would consider fully online, and 60% were open to hybrid options. These pathways can be lifelines, but cuts to advising, technology, or aid risk undermining that promise.
3. Income divides are stark. Families earning under $60,000 were twice as likely to express interest in fully online compared to higher-income families. Yet as state funding declines, public colleges may raise tuition or online fees, making even “affordable” pathways harder to access.
4. Race and ethnicity matter. Black and Hispanic families showed greater openness to online and hybrid formats than Asian or White families. That opportunity will only expand if institutions sustain culturally responsive communication, peer representation, and targeted support.
5. Generational and gender differences are shifting demand. Younger parents and female caregivers are more comfortable with online and hybrid learning. Demand will keep growing, but families may see online options as second-class without continued investments in quality and communication.
6. Region matters, too. Families in the Great Lakes and Far West regions were more receptive to online learning, while New England families leaned more traditional. These cultural and infrastructural differences should shape institutional strategies.
These findings show that online and hybrid education hold real promise, especially for families seeking flexibility, affordability, and access. But that promise rests on a fragile foundation. Budget cuts threaten the very investments that make these models credible: faculty development, instructional design, technology, and support services. Without them, families’ trust could erode.
What this means for colleges: Practical implications
The research points to clear takeaways for colleges and universities:
Flexibility matters, but only if paired with quality. Families want flexible options backed by evidence of rigor, outcomes, and strong faculty engagement.
Hybrid is a strength, not a compromise. Market it as a high-quality “best of both worlds,” not a fallback option.
Equity-focused support is critical. Expand device loan programs, connectivity grants, and first-generation mentoring to close gaps.
Culturally tailored communication builds trust. Engage families with inclusive outreach and visible peer representation.
Generational shifts mean rising demand. Younger parents are more open to online and hybrid; invest now to meet tomorrow’s expectations.
Regional strategy matters. Align program design and marketing with local cultures, broadband realities, and institutional density.
Ultimately, this is about listening. For some families, online pathways may be the only way higher education is possible. For others, a hybrid model that blends connection with convenience is the right fit. Institutions that understand these diverse perspectives and invest in the structures that support them will be best positioned to earn families’ trust and help students thrive.
Babb, S., Stewart, C., & Johnson, R. (2010). Constructing communication in blended learning environments. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 365–374.
Tayebinik, M., & Puteh, M. (2012). Sense of community: How important is this quality in blended courses? In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and Management Innovation (Vol. 30, pp. 606–609). IACSIT Press. Yellow Bus ABA. (n.d.). Online education market size. YellowBusABA.com.
Edan Kauer is a former FIRE intern and a sophomore at Georgetown University.
Elliston Berry was just 14 years old when a male classmate at Aledo High in North Texas used AI to create fake nudes of her based on images he took from her social media. He then did the same to seven other girls at the school and shared the images on Snapchat.
Now, two years later, Berry and her classmates are the inspiration for Senator Ted Cruz’s Take It Down Act (TIDA), a recently enacted law which gives social media platforms 48 hours to remove “revenge porn” once reported. The bill considers any non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII), including AI deepfakes, to fall under this category. But despite the law’s noble intentions, its dangerously vague wording is a threat to free speech.
Artificial intelligence, free speech, and the First Amendment
FIRE offers an analysis of frequently asked questions about artificial intelligence and its possible implications for free speech and the First Amendment.
That may sound like a no-brainer, but deciding what content this text actually covers, including what counts as “arousing,” “humiliating,” or “degrading” is highly subjective. This law risks chilling protected digital expression, prompting social media platforms to censor harmless content like a family beach photo, sports team picture, or images of injuries or scars to avoid legal penalties or respond to bad-faith reports.
Civil liberties groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) have noted that the language of the law itself raises censorship concerns because it’s vague and therefore easily exploited:
Take It Down creates a far broader internet censorship regime than the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which has been widely abused to censor legitimate speech. But at least the DMCA has an anti-abuse provision and protects services from copyright claims should they comply. This bill contains none of those minimal speech protections and essentially greenlights misuse of its takedown regime … Congress should focus on enforcing and improving these existing protections, rather than opting for a broad takedown regime that is bound to be abused. Private platforms can play a part as well, improving reporting and evidence collection systems.
Nor does the law cover the possibility of people filing bad-faith reports.
In the 2002 case Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, the Court said the language of the Child Pornography Protection Act (CPPA) was so broad that it could have been used to censor protected speech. Congress passed the CPPA to combat the circulation of computer-generated child pornography, but as Justice Anthony Kennedy explained in the majority opinion, the language of the CPPA could be used to censor material that seems to depict child pornography without actually doing so.
While we must acknowledge that online exploitation is a very real issue, we cannot solve the problem at the expense of other liberties.
Also in 2002, the Supreme Court heard the case Ashcroft v. ACLU, which came about after Congress passed the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) to prevent minors from accessing adult content online. But again, due to the broad language of the bill, the Court found this law would restrict adults who are within their First Amendment rights to access mature content.
As with the Take It Down Act, here too were laws created to protect children from sexual exploitation online, yet established using vague and overly broad standards that threaten protected speech.
But unfortunately, stories like the one at Aledo High are becoming more common as AI becomes more accessible. Last year, boys at Westfield High School in New Jersey used AI to circulate fake nudes of Francesca Mani, who is 14 years old, and other girls in her class. But Westfield High administrators were caught off guard as they had never experienced this type of incident. Although the Westfield police were notified and the perpetrators were suspended for up to 2 days, parents criticized the school for their weak response.
So to Speak podcast: ‘Robotica: Speech Rights & Artificial Intelligence’
A year later, the school district developed a comprehensive AI policy and amended their bullying policy to cover harassment carried out through “electronic communication” which includes “the use of electronic means to harass, intimidate, or bully including the use of artificial intelligence “AI” technology.” What’s true for Westfield High is true for America — existing laws are often more than adequate to deal with emerging tech issues. By classifying AI material under electronic communication as a category of bullying, Westfield High demonstrates that the creation of new AI policies are redundant. On a national scale, the same can be said for classifying and prosecuting instances of child abuse online.
While we must acknowledge that online exploitation is a very real issue, we cannot solve the problem at the expense of other liberties. Once we grant the government the power to silence the voices we find distasteful, we open the door to censorship. Though it is essential to address the very real harms of emerging AI technology, we must also keep our First Amendment rights intact.
But identifying how and when to deliver that content has been a challenge, particularly given the varying perspectives different disciplines have on generative AI and when its use should be allowed. A June report from Tyton Partners found that 42 percent of students use generative AI tools at least weekly, and two-thirds of students use a singular generative AI tool like ChatGPT. A survey by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab found that 85 percent of students had used generative AI for coursework in the past year, most often for brainstorming or asking questions.
The University of Mary Washington developed an asynchronous one-credit course to give all students enrolled this fall a baseline foundation of AI knowledge. The optional class, which was offered over the summer at no cost to students, introduced them to AI ethics, tools, copyright concerns and potential career impacts.
The goal is to help students use the tools thoughtfully and intelligently, said Anand Rao, director of Mary Washington’s center for AI and the liberal arts. Initial results show most students learned something from the course, and they want more teaching on how AI applies to their majors and future careers.
How it works: The course, IDIS 300: Introduction to AI, was offered to any new or returning UMW student to be completed any time between June and August. Students who opted in were added to a digital classroom with eight modules, each containing a short video, assigned readings, a discussion board and a quiz assignment. The class was for credit, graded as pass-fail, but didn’t fulfill any general education requirements.
Course content ranged from how to use AI tools and prompt generative AI output to academic integrity, as well as professional development and how to critically evaluate AI responses.
“I thought those were all really important as a starting point, and that still just scratches the surface,” Rao said.
The course is not designed to make everyone an AI user, Rao said, “but I do want them to be able to speak thoughtfully and intelligently about the use of tools, the application of tools and when and how they make decisions in which they’ll be able to use those tools.”
At the end of the course, students submitted a short paper analyzing an AI tool used in their field or discipline—its output, use cases and ways the tool could be improved.
Rao developed most of the content, but he collaborated with campus stakeholders who could provide additional insight, such as the Honor Council, to lay out how AI use is articulated in the honor code.
The impact: In total, the first class enrolled 249 students from a variety of majors and disciplines, or about 6 percent of the university’s total undergrad population. A significant number of the course enrollees were incoming freshmen. Eighty-eight percent of students passed the course, and most had positive feedback on the class content and structure.
In postcourse surveys, 68 percent of participants indicated IDIS 300 should be a mandatory course or highly recommended for all students.
“If you know nothing about AI, then this course is a great place to start,” said one junior, noting that the content builds from the basics to direct career applications.
What’s next: Rao is exploring ways to scale the course in the future, including by developing intermediate or advanced classes or creating discipline-specific offerings. He’s also hoping to recruit additional instructors, because the course had some challenges given its large size, such as conducting meaningful exchanges on the discussion board.
The center will continue to host educational and discussion-based events throughout the year to continue critical conversations regarding generative AI. The first debate, centered on AI and the environment, aims to evaluate whether AI’s impact will be a net positive or negative over the next decade, Rao said.
The university is also considering ways to engage the wider campus community and those outside the institution with basic AI knowledge. IDIS 300 content will be made available to nonstudents this year as a Canvas page. Some teachers in the local school district said they’d like to teach the class as a dual-enrollment course in the future.
Get more content like this directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.
Over the past 10 days, dozens of faculty and staff members have had their personal contact information, photos and sometimes addresses broadcast online by anonymous right-wing social media accounts seeking to punish them for comments they allegedly made about the death of conservative firebrand Charlie Kirk. This public campaign of online harassment and intimidation, known as doxing, is “off the charts” right now, said Heather Steffen, an adjunct professor of humanities at Georgetown University.
Steffen is also the director of Faculty First Responders, a group created by the American Association of University Professors in 2020 to track and help faculty members targeted by right-wing media. Doxing has been on the rise since protests over the Israel-Hamas war fractured campuses in 2023, but educators are increasingly coming under attack in “ideologically motivated efforts” to silence dissent, according to an August report from the National Association of Attorneys General. “This shift signals the evolution of doxxing from isolated conduct to a more coordinated form of digital persecution,” the report said.
While the attacks are becoming more frequent and sophisticated, higher ed employees can take steps to minimize the risk of doxing, as well as the damage incurred if it does happen.
1. Keep your personal and work accounts separate.
Remove employers’ names from all of your personal social media accounts—if it’s in your bio, take it out, Steffen advised. “You can state in your bio on social media that your views do not represent your employer, and you don’t need to name the employer in order to do that,” she said.
In many cases, work may demand that you list some contact information publicly, but don’t use that information for personal business, said Rob Shavell, CEO and co-founder of DeleteMe, a service that will find and try to wipe members’ personal information from the web. “The data brokers are getting very good at correlating [work and personal] data and putting them into one dossier,” he said. These days, when DeleteMe’s privacy advisers scan the web for members’ information, they return an average of 750 pieces of personally identifying information per person, up from 225 pieces four years ago.
Also, be aware of what devices, accounts and Wi-Fi networks you’re using, and be sure not to use work-provided equipment or resources for anything other than work, Steffen added.
2. Scrub your information from data-broker websites.
Data brokers collect and sell personal information. Companies like DeleteMe and Incogni will remove your personal information from data-broker websites for a fee; DeleteMe charges $129 per member annually. But for anyone who wants to take a do-it-yourself approach, DeleteMe has published free opt-out guides that walk readers through removing their information from the sites, including Experian, TransUnion and CoreLogic. Steffen also suggests following the steps outlined in the Big Ass Data Broker Opt-Out List, a Github project that explains how to scrub your information from data brokers.
3. Use an email mask or alias when possible.
“Masked emails or phone numbers or even credit cards allow you to sign up for things or make calls or buy things without revealing to every counterparty your real personal information,” Shavell said. DeleteMe offers masking, as do companies like Apple and NordPass. These services create a faux address that will then forward emails to your real account. Google also offers free alias phone numbers through Google Voice that will forward calls to your personal phone. In addition to better security, masking also decreases spam and phishing risks.
4. Breathe before you post (and remember the risk of screenshots).
Even if you’re posting to a private account—say, a “close friends” story on your personal Instagram—anything you put online can still be screenshotted and shared widely, Steffen warned. “Anytime you’re posting or reposting something, a good tool can be to pause and think: Would I be comfortable with my employer, my students and my community knowing that I hold this view, and would I be comfortable with them seeing it expressed in this way?” she said.
5. Protect your accounts with complex passwords and two-factor authentication.
It’s boring, but it’s important, said Viktorya Vilk, director for digital safety and free expression at the nonprofit PEN America, which offers digital safety training to colleges and universities and has created a “what to do” resource for people who have been doxed. “If someone hacks into your Facebook or your email, it’s so hard to get that account back. And it’s also incredibly intrusive and unsettling,” she said. “Having a long, secure password and two-factor authentication makes it almost impossible for someone to be able to hack into your account.”
6. In the event you are doxed: Center yourself, and then secure your physical safety.
“People often have a fight, flight or freeze response. It can be incredibly traumatizing and so very difficult to take steps or use your judgment about what to do when you’re being doxed,” Vilk said. “And so, counterintuitively, the very first thing to do is to take a minute and try to center yourself. For some people that’s taking some deep breaths. For other people, it’s just, like, moving around, wiggling around.”
After that, make sure you’re physically safe, she advised. If your address has been shared, consider staying at a hotel or with friends or family until the storm passes. Consider contacting law enforcement to report the threats, file a police report and let them know you’re at increased risk for swatting—a harassment tactic that involves making a false emergency call in order to dispatch law enforcement to a specific location.
7. Once you are physically safe, document the harassment and lock down your accounts.
Set your social accounts to private mode if they’re not already, and take any steps to limit visibility of your posts, Vilk said. “That’s very easy to switch back after the storm dies down,” she added. Be careful communicating with unfamiliar accounts, emails or phone numbers, and document any threats or harassment you receive. Don’t download attachments or click on links from unknown senders, and do a quick search online to find out more about them before responding.
“Take screenshots when you receive them and then report them to the platform where they’re happening. That can be really stressful, so we really recommend that people recruit friends or family or trusted colleagues to help them do that so that they’re not doing it alone,” Vilk said.
Your cellphone number can also be stolen. “If it starts to circulate online, people will call your cellphone company and pretend to be you and try to reroute traffic,” she said. Protect your number by calling the company and placing a PIN on your account.
UTS deputy vice-chancellor of education and students Kylie Readman. Picture: UTS
In this episode of HEDx, Kylie Readman, the University of Technology Sydney’s deputy vice-chancellor of education and students, outlines a new venture in global online education.
Please login below to view content or subscribe now.
While there is wide agreement that student engagement plays a vital role in learning, educators continue to face uncertainty about what engagement looks like, how best to measure it, and how to sustain it, according to a new study from Discovery Education.
“Discovery Education conducted the EducationInsights report to gain a deeper understanding of how engagement is defined, observed, and nurtured in K-12 classrooms nationwide, and we are thankful to the participants who shared their perspectives and insights with us,” said Brian Shaw, Discovery Education’s Chief Executive Officer. “One of the most important findings of this report is that engagement is seen as essential to learning, but is inconsistently defined, observed, and supported in K-12 classrooms. I believe this highlights the need for a more standardized approach to measuring student engagement and connecting it to academic achievement. Discovery Education has embarked on an effort to address those challenges, and we look forward to sharing more as our work progresses.”
Key findings of the Education Insights 2025–2026: Fueling Learning Through Engagementreport include:
Engagement is broadly recognized as a key driver of learning and success. Ninety-three percent of educators surveyed agreed that student engagement is a critical metric for understanding overall achievement, and 99 percent of superintendents polled believe student engagement is one of the top predictors of success at school. Finally, 92 percent of students said that engaging lessons make school more enjoyable.
But educators disagree on the top indicators of engagement. Seventy-two percent of teachers rated asking thoughtful questions as the strongest indicator of student engagement. However, 54 percent of superintendents identified performing well on assessments as a top engagement indicator. This is nearly twice as high as teachers, who rank assessments among the lowest indicators of engagement.
School leaders and teachers disagree on if their schools have systems for measuring engagement. While 99 percent of superintendents and 88 percent of principals said their district has an intentional approach for measuring engagement, only 60 percent of teachers agreed. Further, nearly one-third of teachers said that a lack of clear, shared definitions of student engagement is a top challenge to measuring engagement effectively.
Educators and students differ on their perceptions of engagement levels. While 63 percent of students agreed with the statement “Students are highly engaged in school,” only 45 percent of teachers and 51 percent of principals surveyed agreed with the same statement.
Students rate their own engagement much higher than their peers. Seventy percent of elementary students perceived themselves as engaged, but only 42 percent perceived their peers as engaged. Fifty-nine percent of middle school students perceived themselves engaged in learning, but only 36 percent perceived their peers as engaged. Finally, 61 percent of high school students perceived themselves as engaged, but only 39 percent described their peers as engaged.
Proximity to learning changes impressions of AI. Two-thirds of students believe AI could help them learn faster, yet fewer than half of teachers report using AI themselves to complete tasks. Only 57 percent of teachers agreed with the statement “I frequently learn about positive ways students are using AI,” while 87 percent of principals and 98 percent of superintendents agree. Likewise, only 53 percent of teachers agreed with the statement “I am excited about the potential for AI to support teaching and learning,” while 83 percent of principals and 94 percent of superintendents agreed.
Even as in-person classes return post-pandemic, online courses haven’t gone away. In fact, many students still opt for online learning because of the flexibility it offers. But one thing is clear: not all online courses are created equal, and one of the biggest differences lies in something many instructors overlook: the course webpage.
Whether you’re using Brightspace, Canvas, or Moodle, how you design your course webpage can make or break your students’ experience. Based on our systematic review of recent studies on online learning and student satisfaction, here’s what we learned—and how you can apply it in your own teaching.
Why Course Webpages Matter More Than You Think
Students form impressions about your course page in less than a second (Lindgaard et al., 2006). If it’s cluttered, confusing, or bland, you might lose them before they even start the first lecture.
We reviewed research involving over 1,600 university students from seven countries. Across the board, students reported that a course webpage’s ease of use, usefulness, and visual appeal significantly influenced their satisfaction and engagement (Lazard & King, 2020; Younas et al. 2021).
How We Did the Research
To better understand what works in online course webpage design, we conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines. Here’s what that looked like:
Databases searched: LearnTechLib, Omni (Carleton University), and reference lists from relevant papers
Keywords: “COVID,” “website,” “online learning,” and “pedagogy”
Inclusion criteria: Peer-reviewed, quantitative studies from 2020–2023, focused on higher education
Total included: 7 studies, 1,614 participants across Australia, China, South Africa, Lebanon, Pakistan, Malaysia, and the U.S.
Figure 1. PRISMA Flow Diagram for the Course Webpage Design Search
Practical Tips for Smarter Course Design
Below are research-based, practical tips instructors can use—that don’t require you to be a web designer. These ideas are easy to implement and can make a big difference.
1. Make Navigation a No-Brainer
Think of your course webpage like your storefront. If people can’t find what they need, they won’t stick around. This makes your life as an instructor harder: you will get more students with last-minute requests for accommodations, as well as students struggling with procrastination.
Use a consistent layout, organize materials by weeks or modules, and give each section clear, descriptive titles. Students should never have to hunt for a syllabus or lecture slides (Bachman & Stewart, 2011; Plous, 2000). I found that having a hyperlink directly on the first page of the course website, helped reduce the amount of student emails on syllabus-related questions (a joy).
Pro tip: Use drop-down menus and collapsible folders to reduce visual clutter.
2. Keep It Clean and Simple
Visual overload is real. Too many colours, clashing fonts, or random clipart can be overwhelming. Stick to a minimalist design with just enough contrast and white space to guide the eye. Use consistent font styles and colours to help students focus (Lazard & King, 2020).
Students reported feeling more satisfied when they could personalize their learning environment—for example, setting their own notification preferences or receiving automatic updates about grades and deadlines (Younas et al., 2021). If your platform allows it, show students how to use these features. Most announcement tools allows you to include the student’s name in the communication by using the code: {firstname} (e.g., Brightspace: https://community.d2l.com/brightspace/kb/articles/6105-automatically-customize-course-content-using-replace-strings). I cannot count the number of students who said they appreciated this customization of information.
Protip: Include a quick walkthrough video or FAQ page on how to customize settings.
4. Build Trust Through Transparency
Technology glitches can tank your credibility fast. Provide assessment submission confirmations, test your hyperlinks, and use clear, timely communication to reduce student anxiety (Hsu et al., 2022).
Protip: Create a “Tech Check” page with test links and troubleshooting steps.
From Theory to Practice: A Usability Framework
Our review supports the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): a course site is more likely to be used—and liked—if students find it both easy to use and useful (Davis, 1989).
Figure 2. Adapted from “The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and its Application to the Utilization of Mobile Learning Technologies,” D. G. Mugo, K. Njagi, B. Chemwei, and J. O. Motanya, 2017, British Journal of Mathematics & Computer Science, 20, p. 4 (DOI: 10.9734/BJMCS/2017/29015). In the public domain.
But we also found that students valued more than just functionality. Our systematic review supported features like customization, organization, and aesthetic appeal as beneficial to student use of the course website (which contributed to higher grades and completion rates).
Quick Design Checklist
Feature
Example
Research Support
Clear navigation
Weekly modules, labeled folders
Bachman & Stewart, 2011
Aesthetic simplicity
Balanced colour palette, consistent fonts
Lazard & King, 2020
Customization
Notification settings, adaptable layout
Younas et al., 2021
Confirmation of actions
Email receipt of submissions
Hsu et al., 2022
Mobile compatibility
Testing on phones and tablets
Plous, 2000
Collaborate with Your Students
Want the best feedback on your course webpage? Ask your students. Mid-semester feedback surveys or co-design sessions can go a long way in improving usability (Yoshida & Thammetar, 2021). I have benefited from undergraduate student input, and these translated to higher ratings for my courses.
Bottom Line: Thoughtful Design = Better Learning
Course webpage design isn’t just about looking polished—our systematic review suggests it’s a key factor in student satisfaction and learning success. Students are more likely to engage when the site is:
Adaptable to their needs
Regularly maintained and updated
So we, as instructors, need to spend some time fine-tuning our websites. The good news is that once you do this for one course, many platforms offer cloning or importing, which makes it easy to transfer your work from one course to another.
If you’re feeling stuck, reach out to your campus teaching and learning centre, look at exemplars, or co-create the website with students. You don’t have to do it alone.
Dr. Kelly M. Babchishin is an assistant professor at Carleton University who specializes in forensic psychology. She teaches large undergraduate and graduate courses, many of which use online or hybrid formats.
Emma J. Holmes is a graduate student and teaching assistant at Carleton University (Department of Psychology). Emma is supported in part by funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Ontario Graduate Scholarship.
Alexis G. Hinkson was an undergraduate student (Department of Psychology) at Carleton University and is now completing her law degree at the University of Ottawa. Alexis has served as a teaching assistant and was hired by Kelly Babchishin to assist her in course design and provided the student perspective.
References
Bachman, C. M., and C. Stewart. 2011. “Self-Determination Theory and Web-Enhanced Course Template Development.” Teaching of Psychology 38 (3): 180–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311411798.
Davis, F. D. 1989. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.” MIS Quarterly 13 (3): 319–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.
Hsu, P. S., E. M. Lee, and T. J. Smith. 2022. “First-Year Instructor’s Designing and Teaching an Online Undergraduate Engineering Course during the COVID-19 Epidemic.” Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 41 (3): 215–43.
Lazard, A. J., and A. J. King. 2020. “Objective Design to Subjective Evaluations: Connecting Visual Complexity to Aesthetic and Usability Assessments.” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 36 (1): 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1606976.
Lindgaard, G., G. Fernandes, C. Dudek, and J. Brown. 2006. “Attention Web Designers: You Have 50 Milliseconds to Make a Good First Impression.” Behaviour & Information Technology 25 (2): 115–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330448.
Younas, A., C. M. N. Faisal, M. A. Habib, R. Ashraf, and M. Ahmad. 2021. “Role of Design Attributes to Determine the Intention to Use Online Learning via Cognitive Beliefs.” IEEE Access 9: 94181–94202. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3093348.
Yoshida, M., and T. Thammetar. 2021. “Education between GovTech and Civic Tech.” International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning 16 (4): 52–68. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i04.18769.
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
In June, Ohio became the second stateto regulate how colleges can use third-party vendors to help launch and operate their online degree programs.
Under a new law, both public and private colleges in Ohio must disclose on their websites for their online programs when they are using vendors to help run those offerings.Staff who work for these vendors, known as online program managers, must also identify themselves when talking to students. And it requires colleges to report OPM contracts annually to the state’s higher education chancellor.
The law, part of a larger state budget bill, additionally prohibits OPMs from making decisions about or disbursing student financial aid.
“Ohio’s law is a step in the right direction,” said Amber Villalobos, a fellow at The Century Foundation, a left-leaning think tank. “It’s great to see transparency laws because students will know who’s running their program, who’s teaching their programs.”
The new law is the latest sign that states may take on a greater role in regulating OPM contracts, heeding calls by consumer advocates for stronger government oversight.
However, Villalobos said Ohio lawmakers could have improved the legislation by barring colleges from entering agreements that give OPMs a cut of tuition revenue for each student they recruit into an online program. Minnesota, the first state to pass a law regulating OPMs in 2024, prohibited its public colleges from striking tuition-share deals with these companies if they provide marketing or recruiting services.
U.S. law bars colleges that receive federal funding from giving incentive-based compensation to companies that recruit students into their programs. However, in 2011, federal guidance created an exception for colleges that enter tuition-share agreements with OPMs for recruiting services — but only if they are part of a larger bundle of services, such as curricular design and help with clinical placements.
But these deals have led to OPMs using misleading recruitment and marketing practices to enroll students and fill seats, Villalobos said.
“When tuition-sharing is used for marketing or recruiting purposes we’ve seen issues like predatory recruitment,” she said.
OPMs under scrutiny
OPMs help colleges quickly set up and market online programs, said Phil Hill, an ed tech consultant. That’s important since launching a successful online program catering to nontraditional working adults can be challenging for colleges that typically enroll 18- to 24-year-olds, Hill said.
“It gives them a way to operate in the online space based on what students expect, but do it right away,” Hill said.
However, OPM contracts have been subject to lawsuits and federal scrutiny in recent years.
In Ohio, for instance, legislators passed the new state law following Eastern Gateway Community College’s closure in 2024 after it offered tuition-free online college programs with an OPM.
After the college began working with the for-profit company Student Resource Center, its enrollment soared from just 3,182 students in fall 2014 to 45,173 enrollees by the fall 2021, according to federal data. Former employees of the college accused the relationship of turning the college into an education mill, Inside Higher Ed reported at the time.
By early 2022, the rapid enrollment growth and the college’s relationship with the Student Resource Center had attracted the attention of the U.S. Department of Education.
The federal agency alleged that year that the college’s free college initiative illegally charged students with Pell Grants more than those without. In response, the Education Department placed the college on Heightened Cash Monitoring 2 status, which forced the institution to pay its students’ federal financial aid out of pocket before seeking reimbursement from the agency.
In 2023, Eastern Gateway reached a deal with the Education Department to end its free college program.Its board of trustees voted to shutter the institution the following year.
Ohio likely had “the worst example of an OPM contract harming students, harming an institution of any state in the country,” said Hill. Legislators were “reacting to that situation and the collapse of that school.”
Colleges nationwide have also faced scrutiny over their OPM relationships.
In 2023, the University of Southern California also winded down its partnership with an OPM on most online degrees they ran together.The move came after a 2023 class-action lawsuit accused USC of misrepresenting an online social work master’s degree program developed with the OPM as the same as its campus-based one.
In January, the Biden administration’s Education Department issued guidance informing colleges that they could lose access to federal financial aid or face penalties if OPMs misrepresent themselves to students. That includes OPM employees implying they work for colleges or representing a virtual program as equivalent to an institution’s campus-based version when they have material differences.
Pros and cons of Ohio’s law
Adam Kissel, a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, criticized Ohio’s new law on the conservative Minding the Campus website in June. Despite being watered-down after it was first introduced in the Ohio House, the bill essentially “required a warning label when a college had an OPM partnership,” Kissel wrote.
However, higher education experts said students will benefit from the disclosures and reporting standards in Ohio’s law.
A 2022 U.S. Government Accountability Office report found that at least 550 colleges worked with OPMs to support at least 2,900 education programs. However, the office couldn’t determine the exact number of OPM arrangements due to a lack of comprehensive data.
“Without any real tracking, any real reporting or accountability systems in place, I think that some states just don’t know how large of a scale the OPMs may be operating at in their state,” said Villalobos. “In some cases, that may be a reason we don’t see states taking action.”
Yet Stephanie Hall, a higher education policy expert, said the Ohio law could have been improved if it had banned institutions from paying companies that provide recruiting services on a commission basis, referring to tuition-share agreements.
“This practice has long been banned in the context of typical, on-campus admissions, but for some reason online students are not afforded the same consideration and protection,” Hall, a former senior director of higher ed policy at the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, said in an email.
Additionally, how Ohio enforces the law’s prohibitions on OPMs controlling or influencing financial aid decisions will be key, said Hall.
OPMs in some arrangements provide input on whether the program’s tuition price is competitive, which Hall argues influences pricing, she said.
Some colleges, through such contracts, also agree to offer promotions such as special scholarships or discounts, which the OPM markets or uses to persuade prospective students to enroll, Hall said.
The availability of financial aid including those scholarships and discounts, for example, is often discussed as OPMs field questions from prospective students about the program and its price on behalf of its college client, she said.
“These activities bring the OPM close enough to financial aid decisions to warrant oversight,” Hall said.
Many contracts between OPMs and colleges include a clause stating that the OPM is not a financial aid servicer — but those clauses are meaningless if regulators don’t verify them, Hall said.
The state’s higher education chancellor’s office should thoroughly review how OPMs are involved in pricing, discounts, scholarships and enrollment strategies, instead of just ensuring that such clauses are in their contracts, she said.
The reforms Hall and others are calling for have merit, said Hill. Transparency about contracts, particularly in public education, is a good thing, he said.
But Hill cautioned against characterizing all OPMs as predators.
“I would argue that without this model, a lot of nonprofit colleges and universities just wouldn’t be able to make an online offering that grows at all,” he said.
New research has found that rural LGBTQ+ teens experience significant challenges in their communities and turn to the internet for support.
The research from Hopelab and the Born This Way Foundation looked at what more than 1,200 LGBTQ+ teens faced and compared the experiences of those in rural communities with those of teens in suburban and urban communities. The research found that rural teens are more likely to give and receive support through their online communities and friends than via their in-person relationships.
“The rural young people we’re seeing were reporting having a lot less support in their homes, in their communities, and their schools,” Mike Parent, a principal researcher at Hopelab, said in an interview with the Daily Yonder. “They weren’t doing too well in terms of feeling supported in the places they were living, though they were feeling supported online.”
However, the research found that rural LGBTQ+ teens had the same sense of pride in who they were as suburban and urban teens.
“The parallel, interesting finding was that we didn’t see differences in their internal sense of pride, which you might kind of expect if they feel all less supported,” he said. “What was surprising, in a very good way, was that indication of resilience or being able to feel a strong sense of their internal selves despite this kind of harsh environment they might be in.”
Researchers recruited young people between the ages of 15 and 24 who identified as LGBTQ+ through targeted ads on social media. After surveying the respondents during August and September of last year, the researchers also followed up some of the surveys with interviews, Parent said.
According to the study, rural teens were more likely than their urban and suburban counterparts to find support online. Of the rural respondents, 56% of rural young people reported receiving support from others online several times a month compared to 51% of urban and suburban respondents, and 76% reported giving support online, compared to 70% of urban and suburban respondents.
Conversely, only 28% of rural respondents reported feeling supported by their schools, compared to 49% of urban and suburban respondents, the study found, and 13% of rural respondents felt supported by their communities, compared to 35% of urban and suburban respondents.
Rural LGBTQ+ young people are significantly more likely to suffer mental health issues because of the lack of support where they live, researchers said. Rural LGBTQ+ young people were more likely to meet the threshold for depression (57% compared to 45%), and more likely to report less flourishing than their suburban/urban counterparts (43% to 52%).
The study found that those LGBTQ+ young people who received support from those they lived with, regardless of where they live, are more likely to report flourishing (50% compared to 35%) and less likely to meet the threshold for depression (52% compared to 63%).
One respondent said the impact of lack of support impacted every aspect of their lives.
“Not being able to be who you truly are around the people that you love most or the communities that you’re in is going to make somebody depressed or give them mental issues,” they said in survey interviews, according to Hopelab. “Because if you can’t be who you are around the people that you love most and people who surround you, you’re not gonna be able to feel the best about your well-being.”
Respondents said connecting with those online communities saved their lives.
“Throughout my entire life, I have been bullied relentlessly. However, when I’m online, I find that it is easier to make friends… I met my best friend through role play [games],” one teen told researchers. “Without it, I wouldn’t be here today. So, in the long run, it’s the friendships I’ve made online that have kept me alive all these years.”
Having support in rural areas, especially, can provide rural LGBTQ+ teens with a feeling of belonging, researchers said.
“Our findings highlight the urgent need for safe, affirming in-person spaces and the importance of including young people in shaping the solutions,” Claudia-Santi F. Fernandes, vice president of research and evaluation at Born This Way Foundation, said in a statement. “If we want to improve outcomes, especially for LGBTQ+ young people in rural communities, their voices–and scientific evidence–must guide the work.”
Parent said the survey respondents stressed the importance of having safe spaces for LGBTQ+ young people to gather in their own communities.
“I think most of the participants recognize that you can’t do a lot to change your family if they’re not supportive,” he said. “What they were saying was that finding ways for schools to be supportive and for communities to be supportive in terms of physical spaces (that allowed them) to express themselves safely (and) having places where they can gather and feel safe, uh, were really important to them.”
Hopelab seeks to address mental health in young people through evidence-based innovation, according to its organizers. The Born This Way Foundation was co-founded by Lady Gaga and her mother, West Virginia native Cynthia Bisset Germanotta.
The organization is focused on ending bullying and building up communities, while using research, programming, grants, and partnerships to engage young people and connect them to mental health resources, according to the foundation’s website.
