Tag: Open

  • Some Grad Schools Open to Admitting 3-Year Degree Holders

    Some Grad Schools Open to Admitting 3-Year Degree Holders

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Chris Ryan/OJO Images/Getty Images

    As a handful of colleges debuted 90-credit degrees this fall, one of the questions most top of mind for students, institutions and accreditors alike was whether graduate schools would admit students with these unusual degrees.

    Now, the College-in-3 Exchange, an organization that advocates for the creation of such programs, has compiled some evidence that they will. The nonprofit conducted a study interviewing 10 graduate school admissions leaders from a range of institution types about how they would hypothetically respond if an applicant had a bachelor’s degree with fewer than the traditional 120 credits. The study was led by Christa Lee Olson, a senior program specialist with College-in-3.

    The majority of respondents said their policies currently preclude reduced-credit degrees, but several said they could see that changing in the future, especially as three-year degrees become more common. Two of the interviewees reported that their institutions had changed their policies to accommodate international three-year degrees, which are common in countries like the U.K. Some also indicated that while they don’t accept reduced-credit degrees, they have mechanisms to make exceptions for specific applicants, especially at the request of a faculty member.

    It’s an important step for College-in-3. As accreditors and state higher education leaders evaluate whether to allow institutions to launch three-year programs, one of their top concerns has been whether employers and graduate schools will accept the shortened degrees. Madeleine Green, the executive director of College-in-3, said she believes this report will serve as evidence to institutions, accreditors and state leaders that graduate programs are open to considering these degrees.

    “Because College-in-3 is such a young movement, and we don’t have evidence of what happens to the graduates … this is suggestive evidence,” she said. “We plan to disseminate this, share it with the states, share it with our members and use it as a positive indicator.”

    The recent surge in three-year programs seems to have shifted the perspectives of some of the admissions leaders included in the report. One respondent noted that institutions near them are creating reduced-credit degrees; when asked if their institution will consider accepting these three-year degrees, “the respondent replied that the value of the bachelor’s degree is not based on the arbitrary length of the degree but rather on how the program enables a student’s learning and development,” the report noted.

    Three respondents also said that their own institution was considering or in the process of developing reduced-credit programs.

    But not every participant felt positively about three-year degrees; one “expressed caution” about the programs and said they’re taking their cues from accreditors, according to the study. (Many accreditors have begun accepting 90-credit degrees, although in some cases, the programs are considered pilots that will be evaluated for their efficacy in several years.)

    The question of whether graduate schools would admit students with a reduced-credit degree speaks to one of the most fundamental challenges of graduate admissions, said Julie Posselt, a scholar of higher education at the University of Southern California and the author of Inside Graduate Admissions: Merit, Diversity, and Faculty Gatekeeping (2016, Harvard University Press): How does one translate the information on a transcript into information about a student’s knowledge and abilities?

    Posselt told Inside Higher Ed she could imagine master’s programs—many of which are revenue generators for their institutions—being open to admitting students with three-year degrees. But she has doubts that doctoral programs, especially at selective institutions, would be as welcoming.

    “A fundamental challenge of selection is that no two humans are created equal or have fundamentally equivalent records. All we have is the information the applicant gives us. Professors have a tendency when making decisions, and admissions decision-makers of all kinds have a tendency, to rely on the metrics they have in front of them,” she said. “Especially in the current environment and in selective programs, I think it’s unlikely to be that any three-year program is likely to generate the same perceived competence, excellence and academic preparation.”

    For that to change, the degrees would not only have to become significantly more common, she said; they would have to crop up at institutions perceived as prestigious.

    One of the respondents in the College-in-3 report shared a similar perspective, emphasizing “the value of engaging high-profile institutions in this conversation to elevate the status of these degrees.”

    The report concludes with recommendations about how to support students in three-year programs who hope to pursue graduate education. Along with continuing to familiarize the higher education world with the idea of three-year degrees, the report’s author also encouraged programs to prepare their students to explain the structure of their degree to graduate schools. In addition, it floated the idea of creating agreements between three-year degree programs and graduate programs.

    “Conventional wisdom tells us that colleges and universities are very slow to change but change they do,” the report concludes. “Although ten interviews did not provide exhaustive information, the willingness of the respondents to consider different pathways to graduate studies suggests that master’s and even doctoral degrees will not be beyond the reach of 3-year degree program graduates.”

    Source link

  • What K-20 leaders should know about building resilient campuses

    What K-20 leaders should know about building resilient campuses

    Key Points:

    When a school building fails, everything it supports comes to a halt. Learning stops. Families scramble. Community stability is shaken. And while fire drills and lockdown procedures prepare students and staff for specific emergencies, the buildings themselves often fall short in facing the unexpected.

    Between extreme weather events, aging infrastructure, and rising operational demands, facility leaders face mounting pressure to think beyond routine upkeep. Resilience should guide every decision to help schools stay safe, meet compliance demands, and remain prepared for whatever lies ahead.

    According to a recent infrastructure report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers, the nation’s 98,000 PK-12 schools received a D+ for physical condition–a clear signal that more proactive design and maintenance strategies are urgently needed.

    Designing for resilience means planning for continuity. It’s about integrating smarter materials, better systems, and proactive partnerships so that learning environments can bounce back quickly–or never go down at all.

    Start with smarter material choices

    The durability of a school begins at ground level. Building materials that resist moisture, mold, impact, and corrosion play a critical role in long-term school resilience and functionality. For example, in flood-prone regions, concrete blocks and fiber-reinforced panels outperform drywall in both durability and recovery time. Surfaces that are easy to clean, dry quickly, and don’t retain contaminants can make the difference between reopening in days versus weeks.

    Limit downtime by planning ahead

    Downtime is costly, but it’s not always unavoidable. What is avoidable is the scramble that follows when there’s no plan in place. Developing a disaster-response protocol that includes vendors, contact trees, and restoration procedures can significantly reduce response time. Schools that partner with recovery experts before an event occurs often find themselves first in line when restoration resources are stretched thin.

    FEMA’s National Resilience Guidance stresses the need to integrate preparedness and long-term recovery planning at the facility level, particularly for schools that often serve as vital community hubs during emergencies.

    Maintenance as the first line of defense

    Preventative maintenance might not generate headlines, but it can prevent them. Regular inspections of roofing, HVAC, plumbing, and electrical systems help uncover vulnerabilities before they lead to shutdowns. Smart maintenance schedules can extend the lifespan of critical systems and reduce the risk of emergency failures, which are almost always more expensive.

    Build flexibility into the design

    Truly resilient spaces are defined by their ability to adapt, not just their physical strength. Multi-use rooms that can shift from classroom to shelter, or gymnasiums that double as community command centers, offer critical flexibility during emergencies. Facilities should also consider redundancies in HVAC and power systems to ensure critical areas like server rooms or nurse stations remain functional during outages.

    Include restoration experts early

    Design and construction teams are essential, but so are the people who will step in after a disaster. Involving restoration professionals during the planning or renovation phase helps ensure the layout and materials selected won’t hinder recovery later. Features like water-resistant flooring, interior drainage, and strategically placed shut-off valves can dramatically cut cleanup and repair times.

    Think beyond the building

    Resilient schools need more than solid walls. They need protected data, reliable communication systems, and clear procedures for remote learning if the physical space becomes temporarily inaccessible. Facility decisions should consider how technology, security, and backup systems intersect with the physical environment to maintain educational continuity.

    Schools are more than schools during a crisis

    In many communities, schools become the default support hub during a crisis. They house evacuees, store supplies, and provide a place for neighbors to connect. Resilient infrastructure supports student safety while also reinforcing a school’s role as a vital part of the community. Designs should support this extended role, with access-controlled entries, backup power, and health and sanitation considerations built in from the start.

    A resilient mindset starts with leadership

    Resilience begins with leadership and is reflected in the decisions that shape a school’s physical and operational readiness. Facility managers, superintendents, and administrative teams must advocate for resilient investments early in the planning process. This includes aligning capital improvement budgets, bond proposals, and RFP language with long-term resilience goals.

    There’s no such thing as a truly disaster-proof building. But there are schools that recover faster, withstand more, and serve their communities more effectively during crises. The difference is often found in early choices: what’s designed, built, and maintained before disaster strikes.

    When resilience guides every decision, school facilities are better prepared to safeguard students and maintain continuity through disruption.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Who’s helping UK unis open their Indian campuses?

    Who’s helping UK unis open their Indian campuses?

    India is becoming the next transnational education (TNE) hotspot, with nine top UK universities having announced plans to open overseas branch campuses out there. Earlier this year, the University of Southampton became the first of this new tranche of campuses to open its doors, with several others close behind.

    As the TNE boom continues, several universities have revealed the independent providers that are helping them set up their campuses in India. Meanwhile, other providers have expressed an interest in this space.

    Here’s our list of who’s working with who.

    Who’s opening a campus in India?

    Nine UK universities have confirmed they are joining the TNE scramble in India. They are:

    1. The University of Southampton
    2. The University of Liverpool
    3. The University of York
    4. The University of Aberdeen
    5. The University of Bristol
    6. Coventry University
    7. The University of Surrey
    8. Lancaster University
    9. Queen’s University Belfast

    Who are they working with?

    Oxford International Education Group (OIEG) – Southampton has confirmed it worked with OIEG in setting up its campus in Gurugram, which opened earlier this year. OIEG provided the financial backing and the professional services needed to set up the campus

    India Business Group – Another provider assisting Southampton on the ground, India Business Group is providing the university with strategic support.

    Emeritus and Daskalos – The University of York has confirmed it is working with the edtech platform Emeritus to set up its Mumbai campus. Working alongside Emeritius is Daskalos – a new venture from Atul Khosla, the founder and vice-chancellor of Shoolini University, as confirmed by Khosla in a LinkedIn post. Khosla has said Emeritus and Daskalos’s partners include “three Russell Group Universities, one of the oldest universities of the world, a top tier US university and a leading Australian university”.

    Khosla has also confirmed on LinkedIn that Daskalos and Emeritus are working with the University of Liverpool on its Bengaluru campus, as well as the University of Bristol on its Mumbai campus. Meanwhile, it appears that the University of Aberdeen may be another institution working with the duo, with a job posting advertising an Emeritus job at the university.

    Study World – The education infrastructure company Study World is working with Coventry on its GIFT City campus, according to local news reports. The company’s group chief operating officer Kate Gerrard is quoted as saying: “Study World has over two decades of experience in delivering a wide range of educational services in partnership with leading international universities around the world. This association with Coventry University in India will be highly beneficial for students in India and the wider region.”

    GUS Global Services – The University of Surrey has confirmed it it is working with GUS Global Services, with GUS leading on strategic support services such as Indian student enrolment support, advice on the local market and campus and operational management.

    For their part, Lancaster University and Queens University Belfast have remained tight lipped on which providers – if any – they are working with as they explore setting up campuses in India.

    Which other providers could be eyeing up opportunities?

    GEDU Global Education – the UK-headquartered company has already invested in several campuses in GIFT City, making it a prime provider to step in and help institutions set up overseas branches in India.

    UniQuad – an arm of ECA, which has previously partnered with UK universities to run overseas campuses and other TNE projects, UniQuad is a new division with a specific goal of introducing university partners to India’s evolving educational landscape, meaning it’s well placed to help in this area.

    Amity – the private Indian provider is already working with major British institutions – such as Queen Mary University of London – on program articulation arrangements in India, as well as having MoUs with others on things like joint research and dual degrees. Could it be looking to expand into new ventures?

    British Council – while the British Council isn’t a private provider, it is a key strategic enabler for institutions looking to set up in India. It can help with policy dialogue and advocacy, support through the UK Universities in India Alliance, as well as providing market intelligence, helping institutions decide which partners are right for them.

    Source link

  • New Bill Would Allow Professors, TAs to Open Carry on Campus – The 74

    New Bill Would Allow Professors, TAs to Open Carry on Campus – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Florida professors, university faculty, and teaching assistants could soon be able to openly carry firearms on campus, thanks to a sweeping new measure filed by a Republican lawmaker.

    Sen. Don Gaetz, R-Crestview, is sponsoring the legislation, entitled “School Safety,” to address security concerns in higher education. If passed, the bill would remove college campuses as gun-free zones — marking a significant shift in how Florida handles gun issues.

    It would become one of the few Second Amendment expansion bills adopted in Florida since the Parkland massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018, which prompted a higher gun-purchasing age and red flag laws.

    In an interview with the Phoenix, Gaetz called his legislation “sadly timed,” adding that he “never wanted” to file a bill like this.

    He referred to a slate of violent incidents in the past few months, including a shooting spree at Florida State University in April, the assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, a shooting at Brown University over the weekend, and, most recently, an anti-Jewish shooting in Australia that left 15 dead.

    “We’re living in a world where our institutions are being threatened,” Gaetz said, adding that he’s already filed another bill aimed at increasing protection outside of churches, mosques, and synagogues. “I’m sorry that I’m having to do this, but it just seems as though places in our society that we thought were safe, even sacrosanct, are now becoming targets.”

    Although he anticipates objections that teachers may abuse the ability to bring a gun to school, Gaetz pointed out that there have been no instances of a school shooting sprouting from an unwell volunteer in the guardian program. This school safety initiative allows trained and vetted school employees to carry concealed weapons on K-12 campuses.

    “None of the parade of terribles have happened that the opponents to the guardian program tried to advance,” he said. “While none of that has happened, people have been killed.”

    What else is in the bill?

    Gaetz isn’t this first Florida lawmaker to try to promote campus carry. At the start of the 2025 legislative session, then-Sen. Randy Fine brought his all-encompassing campus carry bill to its first committee — unlike Gaetz’s, Fine’s bill would have allowed all students to carry — but it was voted down. Fine later left to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    Gaetz said that the heart of his bill is hardening Florida’s state colleges and universities by requiring better threat assessments, better responses to threats, and better communications between first responders and faculty in emergencies.

    SB 896 would allow university employees, faculty, and students who are also working for a college to either openly carry or carry conceal weapons on campus. It also would expand the school guardian program to the university level and create an offense of discharging a firearm within 1,000 feet of school.

    Gaetz said his measure also would require universities to ensure all classroom doors lock during an emergency — especially after FSU students discovered during the April school shooting that their doors could not lock. He estimates that around $60 million will end up being appropriated for the effort, in line with what Gov. Ron DeSantis requested in his budget proposal last week.

    An identical bill has been filed in the House by Rep. Michelle Salzman.

    Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: [email protected].


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • Third Australian university to open in Sri Lanka amid rising demand

    Third Australian university to open in Sri Lanka amid rising demand

    The campus, set to be established in the capital of Colombo with its first intake by mid-2026, will initially offer courses in business and early childhood education, with programs in IT, psychology, engineering, and health “earmarked” for future expansion.

    “We are excited to bring Charles Sturt’s world-class courses to students in Sri Lanka. It will also facilitate new and valuable academic and research connections and build greater awareness of Charles Sturt University and our regional communities internationally,” stated Charles Sturt vice-chancellor, Renée Leon.

    Despite over 160,000 Sri Lankan students seeking tertiary education each year, roughly three-quarters miss out due to limited spaces across just 20 public universities.

    But with a private education market worth over USD$1.1 billion and more than 60,000 Sri Lankan students pursuing transnational education (TNE) each year, Charles Sturt University aims to make its programs more accessible while generating revenue that can be reinvested into its regional education mission.

    “The benefits of this venture are not limited to the students in Sri Lanka and the skills and knowledge they will bring to their nation’s workforce,” Leon said. 

    “This vital and underfunded regional mission remains at the heart of Charles Sturt. It is why we are here and why we are important.” 

    It (Sri Lanka campus) will also facilitate new and valuable academic and research connections and build greater awareness of Charles Sturt University and our regional communities internationally

    Renée Leon, Charles Sturt

    The university will lean on Prospects Education for its TNE delivery in Sri Lanka, similar to its longstanding China Joint Cooperation program, another key TNE venture.

    According to Mike Ferguson, pro vice-chancellor (international) at Charles Sturt, the new Sri Lanka campus “will create high-quality university places in areas of skills priority, aligning closely with the Australian government’s priorities”, he said in a post on LinkedIn.

    Sri Lanka already hosts two Australian institutions: Edith Cowan University, launched in August 2023, and Curtin University in December 2024. Australia’s TNE enrolments in Sri Lanka reached 3,145 in 2022.

    Source link

  • Open Assessment Technologies Launches the Next-Generation “TAO Community Edition”

    Open Assessment Technologies Launches the Next-Generation “TAO Community Edition”

    Empowering the Digital Transformation of the Educational Institutions through a Fair and Inclusive Education Ecosystem with Open Source and Open Standards

    Luxembourg, December 5, 2025 – Open Assessment Technologies (OAT), creators of TAO – the world’s leading open-source digital assessment platform, today announced the upcoming release of the new TAO Community Edition (TAO CE), the world’s leading open-source educational assessment platform. The new version will be available for free download globally on January 5, 2026. This milestone release marks a transformative step toward open, extensible, and community-driven innovation in digital assessment and educational ecosystem.

    The TAO CE includes an expanded suite of modular products–TAO Advance, TAO Grader, TAO Insights, and TAO Portal–providing a powerful, end-to-end integrated stack that enables institutions and developers to own, customize, and manage their assessment infrastructure fully.

    This release is part of the TAO Community Forum, a movement bringing together developers, assessment experts and institutions to co-create more effective, scalable and transparent assessment solutions. Through this ecosystem, users will gain direct access to collaborative tools, community-driven feature requests, roadmap discussions, and upcoming contribution opportunities.

    With the TAO Community Edition and its suite of modular tools, institutions and developers gain complete software ownership, free from vendor lock-in and per-user licensing constraints. The platform’s modular architecture enables users to integrate only the components they need, ensuring maximum flexibility and scalability.

    Thanks to its multilingual interface, supporting over 18 languages, TAO empowers organizations to deliver assessments globally, promoting equity, accessibility, and inclusion in education systems worldwide.

    “Digital assessment thrives when it’s open, extensible, and community-driven, not confined to proprietary systems.” said Mack K. Machida, Co-CEO, Open Assessment Technologies. “With the TAO Community Edition and our upcoming new developer forum, we’re empowering the global community to own their infrastructure, scale their solutions, and shape the next generation of learning from the inside out.”

    Built on open standards like QTI®, LTI®, and WCAG, TAO ensures interoperability and accessibility by design. Most importantly, it offers a platform for community-powered digital transformation, enabling contributors to directly influence the roadmap and functionality. All of this is orchestrated through the TAO Community Forum, offering streamlined oversight across the entire assessment ecosystem. TAO Community Edition and extended modules will be available under the Affero General Public License v3 (AGPLv3).

    How TAO Benefits Educational institutions

    Own your assessment software, not rent it

    Open-source code and transparent licensing keep you in control of your platform, roadmap and data, without black-box dependencies. Standards-first alignment (QTI®, LTI®, xAPI) ensures TAO plugs cleanly into existing LMS, identity, reporting, and proctoring ecosystems.

    Modular, end-to-end stack

    Adopt what you need–TAO Advance (delivery), TAO Grader (manual scoring), TAO Insights (analytics), and TAO Portal (admin)–including built-in, on-site proctoring. Scale capabilities at your pace.

    Community velocity & transparency

    A public developer forum (launching with TAO Community Edition) and contribution model let institutions influence features, share extensions, and accelerate fixes, turning users into co-builders.

    Equity at scale

    WCAG-aligned accessibility and a multilingual experience support inclusive delivery across regions, devices, and bandwidth conditions.

    Data portability & sovereignty

    Open standards and transparent formats simplify export, migration, and long-term stewardship to meet regulatory and archival requirements. Meet country data residency requirements by deploying TAO at the core of your infrastructure.

    About TAO

    TAO, from Open Assessment Technologies, is the leading digital assessment solution for education and career advancement. Modular, customizable, and interoperable by design, TAO empowers users to break free from proprietary constraints, eliminate costly licensing fees, and take full control of their testing resources. With its student interface available in more than 82 languages, TAO delivers over 30 million tests worldwide every year.

    Learn More: www.taotesting.com

     

    Media Contact:
    Miguel Prieto
    Vice President Corporate Strategy
    [email protected]

     

    *QTI®: Question and Test Interoperability
    *LTI®: Learning Tools Interoperability
    *WCAG: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines.
    *QTI® and LTI® are trademarks of the 1EdTech® Consortium, Inc. (1edtech.org)

    Source link

  • Liverpool University’s India campus to open in major Bangalore township

    Liverpool University’s India campus to open in major Bangalore township

    While more details are expected at the University of Liverpool India’s launch event in Bangalore on December 15, the campus in the integrated township — which includes residential, commercial, and institutional facilities — will feature “flexible spaces”, according to the university.

    The campus will have smart classrooms, research and collaborative spaces, specialised labs, and comprehensive co-working hubs for faculty, students, and entrepreneurs, offering a “state-of-the-art, 360-degree learning environment” for its inaugural cohort, set to begin in August 2026.

    “We are looking forward to welcoming our inaugural cohort of talented students in 2026 and providing them with an exceptional learning experience that strengthens their skills and employability,” said Lucy Everest, chief operating officer, University of Liverpool.

    She visited Bangalore and Mumbai this week to meet educators, potential applicants, and alumni as the university plans to grow the campus to 5,000 students in five years and 10,000 in 10.

    “Alembic City is the perfect place to realise this vision and our new campus will provide our students with the very best facilities to support their learning journey with us.”

    By the time we open next summer, we’ll have developed relationships with a wide range of businesses and social enterprises in Bangalore, which will be really important for students
    Tim Jones, University of Liverpool

    The university has also opened admissions for 2026, offering postgraduate programs in accounting and finance and computer science, alongside undergraduate courses in business management, biomedical sciences, computer science, accounting and finance, and a game design program — “which combines the university’s music and computer science departments, something not many other UK campuses are offering in India”, according to vice-chancellor, Tim Jones.

    “What we will ensure is that there’s a ‘Liverpool feel’ to the campus. Students who come to the University of Liverpool, Bangalore, should experience the distinctive elements of Liverpool,” Jones told The PIE News.

    “There will be unique features in the design that I hope students will really appreciate.”

    For Jones — who was part of the 126-member UK delegation to India led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, which included entrepreneurs, cultural figures and university leaders following the landmark trade deal between the two countries — Bangalore was a natural choice for the new campus for a range of reasons.

    The city, a major IT hub with leading Indian and multinational tech and biotech firms, is familiar ground for the red-brick Russell Group university, which has a long-standing, research partnership with the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS) and ongoing collaborations with the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in Bangalore. Both institutions also happen to have two of the world’s oldest and most prominent biochemistry departments.

    Moreover, one of the University of Liverpool’s biggest corporate partners is Unilever, which has an R&D centre in Bangalore, with pharmaceutical companies such as AstraZeneca and IT firms like Wipro also expected to play a role in research, innovation and industry collaboration through the India campus.

    “We did explore other cities, but it was quite easy for us to pick Bangalore because we had already begun building strong relationships in the city and the wider Karnataka region,” stated Jones, who praised the city’s tech-entrepreneurial culture and the opportunities it offers for a university to “engage, collaborate and grow”.

    “By the time we open next summer, we’ll have developed relationships with a wide range of businesses and social enterprises in Bangalore, which will be really important for students. This is a big focus for us this year — we have already started, and we’ll be doing much more.”

    In the lead-up to the campus opening next year, the University of Liverpool will focus on faculty exchanges between the Liverpool and Bangalore campuses, attracting international students, and expanding scholarship opportunities for its India-based cohort, according to Jones.

    But the university — which views global engagement and partnerships as central to its Liverpool 2031 strategy — is not the only UK institution advancing its India campus plans.

    Nine UK universities now have approval to establish campuses in the South Asian country, with the University of Southampton leading the pack, already welcoming around 150 students in the first cohort at its Gurugram campus in August this year.

    In this landscape, the University of Liverpool aims to distinguish itself from other UK institutions by offering distinctive programs and embedding research from “day one”, drawing on lessons from its only other international branch campus — the Xi’an Jiaotong–Liverpool University (XJTLU) in Suzhou, China — as it shapes its approach in India.

    “We have experience from our successful campus in China, which is celebrating its 20th anniversary and has nearly 30,000 students. That experience gives us confidence that we can succeed in India as well,” stated Jones.

    “The funding model was also different 20 years ago. But the exchange of staff and students is embedded in what we do in China. I see the same happening with India as the campus develops.”

    However, despite the China campus’s success, recent reports suggest it may require stronger oversight amid concerns about teaching methods, class sizes, and students’ English proficiency.

    While the rapid push to establish branch campuses in India has also sparked debate about the trend among major UK universities, Jones says he is focused on making Liverpool’s India launch a “big success”.

    “It took us 20 years to go from China to India. There will likely be other ventures in the future, but right now, I’m very focused on making this a big success — for the students, for the university, and for India,” stated Jones.

    Source link

  • Queen Elizabeth’s school to open in August 2026

    Queen Elizabeth’s school to open in August 2026

    The new campus, Queen Elizabeth’s School in Dubai, will bring over 450 years of British academic heritage to the UAE, offering students access to the National Curriculum for England under the same standards that have made the Barnet school a consistent “outstanding” performer and a leader in UK education.

    Developed in partnership with GEDU Global Education, the project recently received initial approval from Dubai’s Knowledge and Human Development Authority (KHDA), making a historic move, as it is the first UK state grammar school to establish an international branch.

    “This landmark approval allows us to accelerate our vision to deliver world-leading K-12 education to students from across the UAE,” said Caroline Pendleton-Nash, CEO of Queen Elizabeth’s Global Schools.

    “The Dubai branch campus will remain faithful to the mission, ethos, tradition, and exacting academic standards of Queen Elizabeth’s School, Barnet, while embracing Dubai’s spirit of innovation and ambition,” she said.

    She added: “In uniting the heritage of one of the UK’s most distinguished schools with the vision of Dubai, we aspire to set a new global benchmark for educational excellence.”

    Opening initially from nursery to year 8, the Dubai campus will then expand in phases to include sixth form. The school’s location in Dubai Sports City provides access to exceptional athletic facilities, ensuring that sport and wellbeing remain integral.

    We are also excited by the potential for international collaboration, which, in time, will build a global network of Elizabethans for the benefit of our new students as well as those within the state sector in Barnet
    Neil Enright, Queen Elizabeth’s School, Barnet

    Neil Enright, headmaster of Queen Elizabeth’s School, Barnet, emphasised the school’s commitment to fostering opportunity and leadership, saying: “We are delighted to have received this encouragement from the KHDA to offer a rounded and enriching QE education to children in the UAE, spreading opportunity and supporting students to become the leaders of their generation.”

    “We are also excited by the potential for international collaboration, which, in time, will build a global network of Elizabethans for the benefit of our new students as well as those within the state sector in Barnet,” he said.

    “[That prior interest] confirmed to us the strength of our brand and the strength of a rounded but highly academic education. So the senior staff and governors here have been looking at this move for quite a long time,” he said.

    This time, though, working with GEDU, the school was confident it was the right move. “They’re educationalists, they are experienced at partnering with a number of universities in other parts of the world…we felt a real alignment of values with them,” said Enright.

    Dan Clark has been appointed as the school’s founding principal, having been deputy head of the elite Marlborough College since 2020.

    “Throughout my career in outstanding schools, I’ve seen how powerful education can be,” said Clark. 

    “It challenges pupils to think deeply, act responsibly and believe in their own capacity to achieve.”

    “These values are fundamental to the QE approach. As founding principal of QE Dubai Sports City, I’m excited to establish a community that will produce confident, able and responsible young people who are ready to shape the future.”

    Source link

  • Arizona Rejects Compact, Others Leave Options Open

    Arizona Rejects Compact, Others Leave Options Open

    The University of Arizona is the latest institution to reject an offer to sign on to the Trump administration’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” issuing its response on the same day feedback on the proposal was due.

    While some universities have rejected the compact outright, Arizona president Suresh Garimella announced the decision in a message to the campus community that sent mixed signals. “The university has not agreed to the terms outlined in the draft proposal,” Garimella wrote. He emphasized the need to preserve “principles like academic freedom, merit-based research funding, and institutional independence.”

    At the same time, he said that some of the compact’s provisions “deserve thoughtful consideration as our national higher education system could benefit from reforms that have been much too slow to develop,” noting that many were already in place at Arizona. He added that the federal government said it was “seeking constructive dialogue rather than a definitive written response.”

    Indeed, in a letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Garimella indicated an openness to further engagement. “We have much common ground with the ideas your administration is advancing on changes that would benefit American higher education and our nation at large,” he wrote.

    Still, he took issue with the administration’s promise of giving signatories preferential treatment in research funding. “A federal research funding system based on anything other than merit would weaken the world’s preeminent engine for innovation, advancement of technology, and solutions to many of our nation’s most profound challenges,” he wrote to McMahon. “We seek no special treatment and believe in our ability to compete for federally funded research strictly on merit.”

    Arizona was one of nine universities the Trump administration reached out to on Oct. 1 offering preferential treatment for federal research funding if they agreed to a compact that would overhaul admissions and hiring, cap international enrollment at 15 percent, revise academic offerings, suppress criticism of conservatives, freeze tuition for five years, and more.

    Amid some rejections from the original nine, the federal government sent additional invitations earlier this month.

    Institutions initially invited to join were Brown University, Dartmouth College, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Arizona, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, University of Texas at Austin, the University of Virginia and Vanderbilt University. Invitations were later sent to Arizona State University, the University of Kansas and Washington University in St. Louis.

    Six of the original invitees have declined to sign: MIT was the first to reject the compact, followed by Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, USC and Virginia.

    The Trump administration has since opened the compact to any institution that wishes to join.

    As of Monday, none of the invited institutions had agreed to the deal, despite a recent push from the White House, which included a meeting with several universities last week. Institutions have until Nov. 21 to make a final decision about whether to sign, according to a letter McMahon sent with the proposal.

    Washington University in St. Louis officials indicated Monday they remain open to the idea.

    Chancellor Andrew Martin announced that the university would provide feedback, or, as he put it, “participate in a conversation about the future of higher education” with the Trump administration. Martin emphasized the importance of having “a seat at the table” for such discussions but said those talks did not equate to signing the compact.

    “It’s important for you to know that our participation in this dialogue does not mean we have endorsed or signed on to the Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education presented to us for feedback by the federal administration. We have not done that. In addition, this decision was not made to advantage ourselves or gain any type of preferential benefit,” Martin wrote. “We firmly believe meaningful progress will best be achieved through open, ongoing dialogue.”

    An Arizona State spokesperson also left open the option to join the compact, writing to Inside Higher Ed by email, “ASU has long been a voice for change in higher education and as President Trump’s team seeks new and innovative approaches to serve the needs of the country, ASU has engaged in dialogue and offered ideas about how to do so.”

    Vanderbilt chancellor Daniel Diermeier noted in an email to the campus community that the university intended to offer feedback on the proposal.

    “Despite reporting to the contrary, we have not been asked to accept or reject the draft compact,” Diermeier wrote. “Rather, we have been asked to provide feedback and comments as part of an ongoing dialogue, and that is our intention.”

    But other universities stayed silent on the day of the initial deadline.

    University of Texas system officials initially announced they were “honored” that the flagship was invited to join, but Austin officials did not have an update on where that invitation stands. Kansas did not respond to requests for comment.

    Source link

  • The REF helps make research open, transparent, and credible- let’s not lose that

    The REF helps make research open, transparent, and credible- let’s not lose that

    The pause to reflect on REF 2029 has reignited debate about what the exercise should encompass – and in particular whether and how research culture should be assessed.

    Open research is a core component of a strong research culture. Now is the time to take stock of what has been achieved, and to consider how REF can promote the next stage of culture change around open research.

    Open research can mean many things in different fields, as the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science makes clear. Wherever it is practiced, open research shifts focus away from outputs and onto processes, with the understanding that if we make the processes around research excellent, then excellent outcomes will follow

    Trust

    Being open allows quality assurance processes to work, and therefore research to be trustworthy. Although not all aspects of research can be open (sensitive personal data, for example), an approach to learning about the world that is as open as possible differentiates academic research from almost all other routes to knowledge. Open research is not just a set of practices – it’s part of the culture we build around integrity, collaboration and accountability.

    But doing research openly takes time, expertise, support and resources. As a result, researchers can feel vulnerable. They can worry that taking the time to focus on high-quality research processes might delay publication and risk them being scooped, or that including costs for open research in funding bids might make them less likely to be funded; they worry about jeopardising their careers. Unless all actors in the research ecosystem engage, then some researchers and some institutions will feel that they put themselves at a disadvantage.

    Open research is, therefore, a collective action problem, requiring not only policy levers but a culture shift in how research is conducted and disseminated, which is where the REF comes in.

    REF 2021

    Of all the things that influence how research is done and managed in the UK HE sector, the REF is the one that perhaps attracts most attention, despite far fewer funds being guided by its outcome than are distributed to HEIs in other ways.

    One of the reasons for this attention is that REF is one of the few mechanisms to address collective action problems and drive cultural change in the sector. It does this in two ways, by setting minimum standards for a submission, and by setting some defined assessment criteria beyond those minimum standards. Both mechanisms provide incentives for submitting institutions to behave in particular ways. It is not enough for institutions to simply say that they behave in this way – by making submissions open, the REF makes institutions accountable for their claims, in the same way as researchers are made accountable when they share their data, code and materials.

    So, then, how has this worked in practice?

    A review of the main panel reports from REF 2021 shows that evidence of open research was visible across all four main panels, but unevenly distributed. Panel A highlighted internationally significant leadership in Public Health, Health Services and Primary Care (UoA 2) and Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience (UoA 4), while Panel B noted embedded practices in Chemistry (UoA 8) and urged Computer Science and Informatics (UoA 11) to make a wider shift towards open science through sharing data, software, and protocols. Panel C pointed to strong examples in Geography and Environment Studies (UoA 14), and in Archaeology (UoA 15), where collaboration, transparency, and reproducibility were particularly evident. By contrast, Panel D – and parts of Panel C – showed how definitions of open research can be more complex, because what constitutes ‘open research’ is perhaps much more nuanced and varied in these disciplines, and these disciplines did not always demonstrate how they were engaging with institutional priorities on open research and supporting a culture of research integrity. Overall, then, open research did not feature in the reports on most UoAs.

    It is clear that in 2021 there was progress, in part guided by the inclusion in the REF guidance of a clear indicator. However, there is still a long way to go and it is clear open research was understood and evidenced in ways that could exclude some research fields, epistemologies and transparent research practices.

    REF 2029

    With REF 2029, the new People, Culture and Environment element has created a stronger incentive to drive culture change across the sector. Institutions are embracing the move beyond compliance, making openness and transparency a core part of everyday research practice. However, alignment between this sector move, REF policy and funder action remains essential to address this collective action problem and therefore ensure that this progress is maintained.

    To step back now would not only risk slowing, or even undoing, progress, but would send confused signals that openness and transparency may be optional extras rather than essentials for a trusted research system. Embedding this move is not optional: a culture of openness is essential for the sustainability of UK research and development, for the quality of research processes, and for ensuring that outputs are not just excellent, but also trustworthy in a time of mass misinformation.

    Openness, transparency and accountability are key attributes of research, and hallmarks of the culture that we want to see in the sector now and in the future. Critically, coordinated sector-wide, institutional and individual actions are all needed to embed more openness into everyday research practices. This is not just about compliance – it is about a genuine culture shift in how research is conducted, shared and preserved. It is about doing the right thing in the right way. If that is accepted, then we would challenge those advocating for reducing the importance of those practices in the REF: what is your alternative, and will it command public trust?

     

    This article was supported by contributions from:

    Michel Belyk (Edge Hill University), Nik Bessis (Edge Hill University), Cyclia Bolibaugh (University of York), Will Cawthorn (University of Edinburgh), Joe Corneli (Oxford Brookes University), Thomas Evans (University of Greenwich), Eleanora Gandolfi (University of Surrey), Jim Grange (Keele University), Corinne Jola (Abertay University), Hamid Khan (Imperial College, London), Gemma Learmonth (University of Stirling), Natasha Mauthner (Newcastle University), Charlotte Pennington (Aston University), Etienne Roesch (University of Reading), Daniela Schmidt (University of Bristol), Suzanne Stewart (University of Chester), Richard Thomas (University of Leicester), Steven Vidovic (University of Southampton), Eric White (Oxford Brookes University).

    Source link