Tag: Programs

  • Can Embattled Women’s and Gender Studies Programs Survive?

    Can Embattled Women’s and Gender Studies Programs Survive?

    Texas A&M University’s move last week to close its women’s and gender studies program is highlighting the longstanding vulnerabilities of a field that grew out of the women’s liberation movement of the 1960s and ’70s and raising questions about its future.

    While faculty and free expression advocates decried the decision as Texas’s latest assault on academic freedom, conservative pundits praised the program’s demise—as well as the elimination of six additional classes—after a course review found them misaligned with a new system board policy limiting classroom discussions of “race or gender ideology.”

    “Texas A & M’s re-examination of its core curriculum and degree programs charts the path forward for other universities that want to ensure their degree programs are high-quality, value-neutral, transparent, and cost-efficient,” Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and legal fellow at the right-wing organization Defending Education, told Fox News Monday. “Others should follow the university’s example.”

    But Texas A&M, which also cited low enrollment as a driver of the women’s and gender studies program’s closure, is already following a trend that started years ago. Since 2023, a spate of other universities—including New College of Florida, Wichita State University and Towson University—have also shuttered their women’s and gender studies programs and departments.

    All of these closures have left scholars “saddened, frightened, and enraged about the current state of the field,” according to a 2025 statement from the National Women’s Studies Association (NWSA), “[W]e must not despair. We must resist.”

    But given the intensified financial and political pressures to root out all diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives that universities across the country are under, women’s and gender studies scholars expect the interdisciplinary field—and other affinity studies—to face even more scrutiny and program closures in coming years. However, that pressure likely won’t be enough to entirely dismantle the field, which has influenced many other fields over the past 55-plus years.

    “What we are experiencing now is an alarming, but not surprising, escalation of nefarious maneuvers meant to repress our reach and impact such as demonizing our field and our scholar-practitioners, distorting our theories, and banning the use of inclusive language to defund our research,” Jessica N. Pabón, president of NWSA, said in an email to Inside Higher Ed.

    Scholars believe much of that backlash stems from the field’s aim to interrogate the gender and sexuality norms that the Trump administration and its allies are trying to mandate through policies that stifle academic research and classroom discussion about women and the LGBTQ+ community.

    “Our field poses questions and produces knowledge that directly challenges systems of power that rely on the subjugation and exploitation of some to the benefit of the most privileged in society,” Pabón said. “Our scholarship is meant to inform and empower the populations that those in power (i.e., the ones attacking our field) control, discipline, and punish for questioning the social order, the status quo.”

    It’s not possible to put this cat back in the bag. We’re never going to get rid of the study of gender. It’s just too integrated into many things—and women won’t have it.”

    Joan Wolf, an associate professor in the sociology department at Texas A&M

    A History of Critiques, Attacks

    Attacks on scholarship about women, gender and sexuality are nothing new.

    In 1933, shortly after Adolf Hitler ascended to power in Germany, the Nazis looted and burned the entire contents of the Institute for Sexual Science in Berlin. In the 21st century, numerous other countries, including Russia, Brazil and Hungary, have taken up the anti-gender studies torch. For instance, in 2018 the Hungarian government withdrew accreditation from gender studies programs, with one official remarking that it “has no business [being taught] in universities,” because it is “an ideology not a science.”

    And as American politics has drifted further to the right in recent years, the discipline has become a favorite target of right-wing criticism here.

    Even before the second Trump administration issued executive orders broadly banning DEI and “gender ideology” in higher education, Republican lawmakers in Wyoming and Florida had already attempted to defund women’s and gender studies programs, accusing them of indoctrinating students and questioning the degree’s worth. In 2023, New College’s board of trustees voted to eliminate the gender studies program after Christopher Rufo, a New College of Florida trustee and vocal DEI opponent declared, “There is great historical precedent for abolishing programs that stray from their scholarly mission in favor of ideological activism.”

    The gender studies program at New College began in 1995.

    Independent Picture Service/Universal Images Group/Universal Images Group Editorial/Getty Images

    One year later, Florida governor Ron DeSantis ordered the state to study the return on investment of remaining gender studies programs and other majors, such as nursing, computer science and finance, asserting that “It’s not fair [that] the taxpayer,” referencing truck drivers specifically, should pay for student loans “for someone’s degree in gender studies.” (According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, graduates of cultural and gender studies programs earn a median annual income of $63,000 compared to a $66,000 median for all graduates with a bachelor’s degree.)

    But skepticism about the value of women’s and gender studies predates the Trump administration.

    “We are accustomed to this false idea that studying gender or studying sexuality in an inclusive and intersectional manner is not ‘real’ research,” Pabón said. “We’ve received this critique from many of our academic peers for the entirety of our existence, a sentiment that comes from the eugenicism and biological essentialism that have kept women, gender expansive folks, disabled, and racially minoritized folks outside of the classroom, textbooks, and canons of intellectual work.”

    Challenging those sentiments is what spurred the creation of the field more than 50 years ago as more and more women gained access to higher education, entering graduate programs and getting hired as faculty.

    “When they got into these positions, they began to ask questions about the history of women,” said Carrie Baker, chair of the women, gender, and sexuality program at Smith College. “They asked ‘Where are the women in literature? Where are the women writers? Where are women in history?’”

    So, they developed courses to fill in those gaps across an array of disciplines, such as history, medicine, anthropology and sociology. In 1970 San Diego State University launched the first women’s studies program in the country. More followed, and as of 2023 there were more than 800 such departments and programs, according to data from the NWSA.

    “The influence of Women’s Studies has touched almost every traditional academic field,” Baker said. For example, “the fact that we now do medical studies on women at all is due to [those critiques].”

    Knowledge is a tricky thing to control. You can refuse to fund certain types of research and can cancel classes, and people will find alternative ways to share and make new knowledge.”

    Amy Reid, program director of PEN America’s Freedom to Learn initiative

    ‘More Necessary Now’

    And despite the recent criticism, enrollment in women’s and gender studies courses was on the rise as of 2023, the latest year for which data is available.

    “Women’s and gender studies is more necessary now than ever to understand what’s going on,” said Baker, adding that enrollment in her courses doubled after Trump was elected. “The policies of the Trump administration hurt women and those hurt women are going to need us. … Going backward on gender issues is going to put a lot of women in bad situations.”

    However, enrollment numbers in most of these programs still look small compared to more mainstream majors. And many universities have cited low enrollment as the reason given for closing women’s and gender studies programs; Texas A&M, for instance, noted that its program has just 25 majors and 31 minors enrolled prior to announcing plans to wind it down last Friday.

    “One of the biggest reasons why we have low enrollment is that we have no resources and students don’t even know we exist,” said Joan Wolf, an associate professor in the sociology department at Texas A&M who has taught women’s and gender studies courses there for decades. “We’re not going to have as many majors as something like psychology, but that’s never been the case.”

    Often, women’s and gender studies exists as a program, not a department, as is the case at Texas A&M. That typically means faculty have shared appointments in other departments, leaving programs with small budgets and reduced ability to advocate for more resources. Nonetheless, the classes they offer help to round out students’ education.

    “The big service women’s and gender studies do is in the minors,” Wolf said. “I’ve had students pursuing careers in marriage counseling, gynecology and business who want to understand the social dimensions of gender.”

    Protesters hold two signs on white poster board that say Let Professors Teach Truth and Higher Ed is a Public Good

    The Texas A&M program cuts follow a new policy that restricts the teaching of race and gender.

    Jason Fochtman/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images

    However, eliminating the women’s and gender studies program at Texas A&M or elsewhere won’t stop students and faculty from considering gender in their scholarly work and beyond.

    “It’s not possible to put this cat back in the bag,” Wolf said. “We’re never going to get rid of the study of gender. It’s just too integrated into many things—and women won’t have it.”

    But the field’s success in influencing so many other fields, doesn’t justify dismantling it either, said Amy Reid, program director of PEN America’s Freedom to Learn initiative and former director of the now-defunct gender studies program at New College of Florida.

    “Gender Studies, women’s and gender studies, have a methodology that is distinct from the methodology of other disciplines,” she said. “It allows people to expand beyond the disciplinary bounds of any one field, and that creative synthetic process is important for students who are trying to learn.”

    And that’s also the value-add of other interdisciplinary fields—such as Black studies, Indigenous Studies and Middle Eastern studies—which like women’s and gender studies, sprang from the entry of nonwhite scholars to the professoriate in the mid-20th century after racial segregation was outlawed.

    While the professoriate has become more diverse in terms of gender, race and ethnicity, those gains are “connected to the devaluing of higher education as a field,” Reid said. “When higher education was the domain of white men, it was seen as more prestigious; as women and people of color have gotten footholds in higher education, lo and behold, the salaries have gone down and the sector is more vulnerable to attack.”

    Reid suspects many of those other affinity fields will also face increased threats and criticisms—if they aren’t already—amid federal and state crackdowns on university curricula. As of last week, the University of Iowa is still reviewing low-enrollment majors, including African American studies and gender, women’s and sexuality studies, for potential elimination or consolidation.

    “We are going to see more closures over the next number of years, and we’re going to continue to see our students across the country paying the price,” she said. “But knowledge is a tricky thing to control. You can refuse to fund certain types of research and can cancel classes, and people will find alternative ways to share and make new knowledge.”

    Source link

  • 4-Year Institutions Eye Programs Eligible for Workforce Pell

    4-Year Institutions Eye Programs Eligible for Workforce Pell

    When the U.S. Department of Education cited short-term workforce programs as a priority for grants from the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), community college leaders celebrated. After all, many have spent decades building up these credential options, which are expected to be the main beneficiaries of the Trump administration’s Workforce Pell funding.

    So, they were somewhat surprised when the FIPSE grant winners were announced last month and showed a number of four-year colleges and universities on the list.

    Almost half of the grants doled out, 10 out of 22, went to higher ed institutions that aren’t community colleges. (Nine were four-year colleges or universities, plus Meharry Medical College, a private historically Black medical school. Michigan State University’s proposal included community college partnerships, but none of the others did.) Of the four-year institutions chosen, four of them—University of Missouri, Michigan State University, Mississippi State University and University of North Dakota—boast R-1 status, the coveted Carnegie classification connoting “very high” research activity. These types of institutions aren’t historically known for their robust short-term workforce credentials, but they won FIPSE grants for such programs including in data skills and construction.

    David Baime, senior vice president for government relations at the American Association of Community Colleges, said community college advocates are thrilled to see ED prioritize short-term programs. At the same time, “we were a little surprised at the list of recipients, because they do not reflect the distribution of work that’s being done on campuses in this area,” Baime said. Community colleges have shown “deep and longstanding engagement” in developing short-term programs.

    Now some four-year institutions seem to be getting in on the short-term credentialing trend as students signal growing interest in these programs. A number of institutions have started making their first forays into the microcredentialing landscape. While some are embedding certificates and other types of credentials from external providers, such as Coursera, into their existing programs, others are producing short-term programs in-house as an extra draw for students, covering everything from tech skills to the liberal arts.

    With financial headwinds facing many higher ed institutions and new federal dollars on offer, “there’s a lot of toe-dipping going on right now,” said Carlo Salerno, managing director of education insights at the Burning Glass Institute, which collects data on credentials and the workforce. “I do think that traditional four-year public institutions are branching out in a way that they haven’t before.”

    ‘A Market-Driven Response’

    Experts say a few factors might account for the unexpected mix of grant winners.

    Colleges only had a month to apply for the funds; the department announced the FIPSE grant competitions in November with a December deadline, Baime noted. Community colleges don’t necessarily have dedicated grant writers at the ready to jump on such a task like many universities do, so limited bandwidth “may have been a factor,” he said. “We knew that there was going to be a scramble to get applications put together.”

    But he also believes four-year colleges and universities are investing more in short-term programs as the country faces skilled workforce shortages. He said he’s not surprised to see four-year institutions having a “market-driven response to what is a clear economic need” and wading into types of programs historically offered at community colleges.

    Four-year institutions are motivated by a “confluence” of forces to venture into this new territory, said Salerno, including financial pressures from enrollment declines driven by the demographic cliff, drops in international students and public skepticism about the value of a degree.

    “You have to start suddenly tapping new enrollment resources to make up the difference,” Salerno said. And at a time when students want assurances that degrees lead to jobs, “schools are becoming increasingly in tune to that.” Offering explicitly workforce-oriented programs is one way to better ensure that “what is taught is aligned with what is sought.”

    The name recognition that some prominent universities enjoy might also add allure to students interested in short-term programs and to employers who trust the brand, he pointed out.

    Short-term programs at such universities “provide a very compelling value proposition for somebody who may have otherwise not thought that [they] could even go to a school like that to burnish [their] credentials,” he said.

    He doesn’t see those universities’ offerings competing with community colleges’, which have strong regional reputations, but he suspects “they will invariably crowd out smaller providers.”

    Seeking Value

    Thomas Brock, director of the Community College Research Center, said he’s heartened to see four-year institutions looking for new ways to attract students, including from demographics they might not have served before.

    The trend signals “some rethinking at four-year institutions [about] how they do business, what kind of students they want to attract and for what purposes,” he said. “Community colleges and four-year institutions alike I think are viewing short-term Pell as an opportunity to get students there that wouldn’t be there otherwise.”

    Regardless of the type of institution, Brock hopes colleges stand up high-quality programs.

    “The caution that comes from grumpy researchers like myself is that, over the years, there’s not a lot of evidence that short-term programs really do lead to higher earnings—or to family-sustaining earnings at any rate,” Brock said. “The million-dollar question for short-term Pell is: Will institutions be able to identify opportunities that make sense for their particular communities, for the employers that they are serving?”

    Jeffrey E. Holm, vice provost for strategic programming, analytics and effectiveness at the University of North Dakota, has similar worries as universities jump on the short-term credential bandwagon.

    Short-term programs aren’t new for his institution, which has been offering shorter noncredit programs and certificates within its undergraduate and graduate programs for upwards of two decades, in part to better serve rural areas of the state. The university also embeds short-term programs from other providers on its platforms. University of North Dakota faculty members won one of the FIPSE grants to stand up a new short-term data skills pathway in atmospheric sciences.

    While Holm is “cautiously optimistic” about Workforce Pell—and open to exploring it for other programs—he’s concerned about a “boom and bust situation” as institutions rush to set up and expand options that may not have the same level of industry buy-in.

    “There’s a lot of hype,” Holm said. “There’s a lot of interest in these, but the interest is here and now. If you get that certificate, will that serve you well five years from now, ten years from now? I don’t know the answer to that … Even if it might be advantageous for the next couple of years, I have a little bit longer-term concerns about the sustainability over time of a return on investment.”

    Source link

  • Authentic Content for Online Programs: Proof-Driven Ideas

    Authentic Content for Online Programs: Proof-Driven Ideas

    Reading Time: 11 minutes

    Fully online programs are no longer emerging alternatives. They are established, competitive, and increasingly scrutinized. Prospective students understand that online learning is widely available. What they question is whether a specific program is credible, engaging, supportive, and capable of delivering real outcomes.

    This shift has fundamentally changed how institutions must approach online program marketing. Generic messaging, polished stock imagery, and surface-level claims no longer build confidence. Today’s prospects are looking for proof. They want to understand what learning actually looks like, who they will interact with, how support works in practice, and what outcomes they can realistically expect after graduation.

    This is where authentic content for online programs becomes one of the most powerful enrollment drivers available. Authenticity reduces perceived risk, shortens decision cycles, and builds trust in online learning long before a prospect ever speaks with an admissions advisor.

    At Higher Education Marketing, we see this pattern repeatedly. Institutions that invest in proof-driven storytelling—grounded in real student experiences, outcomes, and transparency—consistently outperform those that rely on abstract promises. This guide breaks down how to create creative content for online courses that earns trust, clarifies the learning experience, and supports sustainable enrollment growth.

    What “Authentic Content” Really Means in Online Program Marketing

    Authenticity in education marketing is often misunderstood. It does not mean being informal, unpolished, or casual with institutional branding. Authentic content is defined by credibility, specificity, and verifiability. In short, it must sound true—and be true.

    A useful test: if your content could appear on another institution’s website with little or no change in meaning, it isn’t authentic enough.

    Authentic content for online programs should:

    • Demonstrate how learning actually works in your online environment
    • Feature real students, instructors, and support staff—not stock representations
    • Address both benefits and challenges of online learning
    • Set clear expectations around workload, timelines, and outcomes
    • Support claims with concrete examples or data

    Authenticity also means answering the questions prospective students are already asking. What is faculty engagement like online? How often do students interact with peers? What support exists if they fall behind? Will this credential lead to real career opportunities?

    When institutions answer these questions clearly—and support them with evidence such as course previews, alumni outcomes, or faculty welcome videos—they build trust by default. This type of content does not rely on slogans. It earns confidence by being specific, transparent, and grounded in lived experience.

    How do you make online programs feel real to prospective students?
     Show how learning actually happens. LMS walkthroughs, assignment previews, and real student stories turn an abstract promise into a tangible experience.

    Are you looking for education marketing services?

    Our expert digital marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students!

    Why Trust Is the Primary Conversion Barrier for Fully Online Programs

    Unlike on-campus programs, fully online offerings must build trust without physical presence. Prospective students cannot tour facilities, attend in-person events, or casually meet faculty. Every credibility signal must come through digital touchpoints.

    This creates a trust gap—and it is often the biggest barrier to conversion.

    Common concerns include:

    • Will I feel isolated?
    • Are instructors accessible and engaged?
    • Will employers value this credential?
    • What academic and career support will I receive?
    • Can I realistically balance this program with work and family life?

    Institutions must address these concerns directly. Not with reassurance, but with evidence. Trust-building content should reduce uncertainty at every stage of the funnel—from search and program pages to nurture emails and application follow-up.

    Effective trust signals include:

    • Online-specific student success stories
    • Transparent explanations of course structure and faculty engagement
    • Visible instructor presence
    • Clear depictions of peer interaction and community
    • Outcome data supported by alumni or employer validation

    Trust is not built with a single asset. It requires consistency. When credibility signals appear throughout the student journey, confidence grows—and conversions follow.

    The Proof Stack: Seven Trust Signals That Convert Online Prospects

    High-performing online program marketing is built on proof, not promises. Leading institutions deploy a layered proof stack—a coordinated system of content assets designed to address specific student concerns.

    Each layer removes friction. Together, they create clarity.

    1. Outcome Proof

    Show what happens after graduation by highlighting graduate success stories within your authentic content for online programs. Share specific, verifiable outcomes such as job placements, promotions, salary growth, licensure results, or portfolio examples. Concrete evidence like this does far more to build trust in online learning than broad claims about “career readiness.”

    2. Experience Proof

    Show the learning environment itself. LMS screenshots, sample assignments, course modules, and weekly schedules demystify the experience and reduce anxiety.

    3. Faculty Proof

    Instructor quality matters deeply online. Introduce faculty as active educators. Short videos, interviews, or Q&As explaining feedback style and engagement expectations build confidence.

    4. Support Proof

    Demonstrate how advising, tutoring, technical help, and career services function for online students. Testimonials describing real support moments are especially powerful.

    5. Community Proof

    Isolation is a common fear. Counter it with visible evidence of interaction: discussion boards, cohort models, group projects, and virtual events.

    6. Credibility Proof

    Accreditation, rankings, partnerships, and employer recognition reinforce legitimacy—especially when tied specifically to online offerings.

    7. Integrity Proof

    Be honest. Clarify who the program is—and is not—for. Address time commitments and expectations openly. Transparency builds credibility faster than perfection.

    No single asset builds trust alone. The strongest strategies distribute proof across the funnel, allowing evidence—not persuasion—to do the work.

    Creative Content for Online Courses: Proof-Driven Ideas That Scale

    Effective online course marketing is not about flashy production. It’s about relevance. Creativity in this context means answering real questions with clarity and evidence.

    Scalable, high-impact ideas include:

    • “A week in the life” student profiles
    • LMS walkthrough videos
    • Assignment-to-career skill explainers
    • Faculty office-hour previews
    • Student decision-journey testimonials
    • Alumni outcome spotlights
    • Discussion board or live session previews
    • Short FAQ videos addressing workload and flexibility

    Each asset should serve a single purpose: reduce doubt and build confidence. When content answers real concerns with real proof, it becomes both creative and effective.

    What types of content build trust fastest for fully online courses?
     Proof-focused content—outcomes, faculty presence, support visibility, and clear expectations—outperforms general promotional messaging.

    Showcasing the Online Learning Experience (Without Overproduction)

    Prospective students do not need cinematic videos. They need visibility.

    Screen recordings, narrated walkthroughs, and lesson previews are effective storytelling formats because they show what learning actually looks like. A simple LMS tour or assignment walkthrough answers practical questions and builds familiarity.

    When video is not possible, authentic storytelling can still be delivered through:

    • Written graduate success stories that highlight real outcomes
    • Anonymized learning journey case studies that show progress over time
    • Instructor-led lesson explanations that clarify teaching style and expectations
    • Platform demos that reveal how students engage with course materials
    • Audio interviews that capture candid student or faculty perspectives

    Clarity beats polish. When students can visualize the experience through effective storytelling, uncertainty fades—and confidence follows.

    Online Student Testimonials That Feel Credible

    Strong testimonials follow a narrative structure:

    1. Starting point: Who is the student, and why did they enroll?
    2. Challenge: What concerns or obstacles did they face?
    3. Support moment: Where did the institution make a difference?
    4. Outcome: What changed as a result of the program?
    5. Advice: What would they tell future students?

    Avoid anonymous praise. Specificity builds trust. Include names, programs, timelines, and real outcomes whenever possible.

    What makes an online testimonial credible?
     Context, specificity, and lived experience. Avoid generic statements and overly polished language.

    Online Learning Community Building: Making Connection Visible

    Community is one of the most questioned—and misunderstood—aspects of fully online education. Prospective students often assume that without physical proximity, meaningful connection is limited or nonexistent. If they cannot see interaction, collaboration, and peer engagement, they assume it simply does not exist.

    This perception represents a major emotional barrier to enrollment. While flexibility and access attract interest, uncertainty around belonging and support often stalls decision-making. In online education, absence of visible community is interpreted as absence of community itself.

    This is where intentional storytelling becomes critical.

    To counter skepticism, institutions must actively show how students connect, collaborate, and support one another throughout the online learning experience. Community cannot be implied; it must be demonstrated through clear, observable proof points embedded across program pages, content hubs, and recruitment campaigns.

    Effective community-focused storytelling does not rely on vague claims about “engagement” or “collaboration.” Instead, it makes interaction tangible by revealing how connection actually unfolds in day-to-day learning.

    High-impact examples include:

    • Screenshots or short clips of live class sessions with visible discussion, questions, and instructor facilitation
    • Real examples of group projects, including collaboration tools (shared documents, discussion threads, virtual workspaces)
    • Clear overviews of mentorship programs, highlighting how peer mentors, alumni, and faculty interact with students
    • Spotlights on student-led initiatives, clubs, or virtual events that extend beyond coursework
    • Evidence of consistent instructor presence through discussion board participation, feedback examples, and guided conversations

    When presented well, this type of storytelling reframes online learning from a solitary experience into a shared academic journey. Prospective students begin to visualize themselves participating—not passively consuming content, but actively engaging with peers, instructors, and a broader learning network.

    Crucially, visible community reduces one of the most powerful emotional objections to online education: the fear of going through the experience alone. When connection is made explicit, confidence replaces hesitation.

    Real-World Examples From Prestigious Institutions 

    Harvard Business School Online: HBS Online emphasizes learner outcomes and authenticity by showcasing real student success stories and measurable results. On its site, the school highlights how its certificate programs lead to tangible career advancements – learners report job promotions, salary increases, and career transitions as a direct result of the online courses. The inclusion of learner testimonials and outcome data builds credibility, allowing prospective students to see the real-world impact of HBS Online’s programs.

    HEM 1HEM 1

    Source: Harvard Business School Online

    UC Berkeley School of Information: Berkeley’s I School provides an online experience video library that offers an authentic window into its programs. These videos feature faculty insights and student perspectives, showcasing the rigorous curriculum, collaborative online environment, and even on-campus immersion sessions. By letting prospective students virtually “step inside” the learning experience, Berkeley illustrates transparency in course design and highlights faculty visibility and student interaction in a compelling, real way.

    HEM 2HEM 2

    Source: UC Berkeley School of Information

    Oregon State University Ecampus: OSU Ecampus prioritizes learning experience transparency through its online course demos. The Ecampus “Preview an online course” feature allows prospective students to explore actual course modules and interactive elements before enrolling. From instructor introduction videos to virtual labs and quizzes, these previews give an authentic taste of the online classroom. This strategy demystifies online learning and demonstrates the innovative technology and teaching methods OSU uses to keep students engaged.

    HEM 3HEM 3

    Source: Oregon State University Ecampus

    Athabasca University: Athabasca University’s website prominently features student success stories to build authenticity and trust. These first-hand accounts from graduates of its fully online programs highlight personal achievements and career outcomes. For example, one alumna credits landing a new tech job to the skills gained through her Athabasca degree. By sharing such testimonials (often in the students’ own words), Athabasca underscores the real successes of its learners and the supportive, flexible environment that helped them thrive.

    HEM 4HEM 4

    Source: Athabasca University

    University of Illinois – Gies College of Business: Gies showcases online MBA alumni outcomes as proof of its program’s value. In its news and updates, the college reports impressive career results for graduates of the iMBA program. Surveys of alumni indicate an average 23% salary increase post-degree, and over half of online MBA students earn a promotion or new job offer during their studies. By publicizing these ROI metrics and alumni success stories, Gies effectively communicates the credibility and real-world career impact of its online programs.

    HEM 5HEM 5

    Source: University of Illinois – Gies College of Business

    Penn State World Campus: Penn State’s World Campus highlights numerous online graduate success stories to demonstrate authenticity and outcomes. Its “Success Stories” section shares profiles of adult learners who balanced work, life, and education to earn their degrees online. Graduates speak to how the flexible Penn State online format enabled their career advancement and personal growth (one student noted it allowed her to be “a parent, a great student, and a professional” all at once). These real narratives exemplify the supportive learning community and tangible benefits that World Campus provides.

    HEM 6HEM 6

    Source: Penn State World Campus

    Imperial College Business School: Imperial engages students as content creators through its online student blog. Current students across various programs (including online and part-time degrees) write blog posts about their experiences, challenges, and insights. This first-person content – for instance, students discussing their MBA journey or sharing an “on-campus week” from an online program perspective – adds a highly authentic voice to Imperial’s marketing. By spotlighting student-written stories, the Business School enhances transparency and relatability, letting prospective students hear directly from their peers.

    HEM 7HEM 7

    Source: Imperial College Business School

    University of Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh provides rich online student experience content for its distance learners. Its official online learning pages and student-driven blogs offer guidance on how online programs work, tools for success, and genuine accounts from students. Prospective learners can find tips from current online students on topics like time management and balancing studies, as well as blog posts detailing personal experiences of adjusting to online learning. By openly sharing these resources and stories, Edinburgh ensures transparency about the online learning journey and fosters authenticity through the voices of its student community.

    HEM 8HEM 8

    Source: University of Edinburgh

    Trust Is Earned, Not Claimed

    Fully online programs succeed when trust is earned, not assumed. The institutions seeing the most sustainable enrollment growth are not the ones making the boldest claims, but the ones providing the clearest answers.

    Authentic, proof-driven content does more than attract attention. It qualifies leads, supports faster decision-making, and builds long-term credibility. Prospective students are no longer persuaded by marketing gloss. They want to see how a program works, who it serves, and what it delivers.

    Authenticity is not about volume or tone. It’s about substance. It means showing real student journeys, revealing how support systems function, and making the learning experience transparent from day one.

    In a digital education market defined by choice and skepticism, trust is your most valuable differentiator. And trust isn’t something you say you have—it’s something you prove, consistently, through the content you publish.

    Do you need tailored and actionable online course marketing ideas to help reenergize your student recruitment efforts?

    Are you looking for education marketing services?

    Our expert digital marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students!

    FAQs

    How do you make online programs feel “real” to prospective students?
    Show how learning actually happens: include LMS walkthroughs, assignment previews, and real student stories. Avoid abstract claims. Clarity and visibility around the experience make it tangible.

    What types of content build trust fastest for fully online courses?
    Proof-focused content: student outcomes, faculty presence, support interactions, and clear course expectations. Specifics convert better than general claims.

    What should an online program testimonial include to feel credible?
    A credible online program testimonial should include the student’s background, challenges faced, how they were supported, and the outcome achieved. It should reference their program and timeline, and ideally end with advice for future students. Specificity and context are key—avoid anonymous or overly polished quotes.

    Source link

  • George Washington U Pauses Admissions to 5 Ph.D. Programs

    George Washington U Pauses Admissions to 5 Ph.D. Programs

    George Washington University is pausing admissions to five Ph.D. programs for fall 2026, citing financial hardships.

    According to social media posts, applicants to the programs received emails last week alerting them that the programs “will not be reviewing applications for the 2026–2027 academic year.” The emails went on to say that their application fees would be refunded and offered them the opportunity to be considered for master’s programs instead.

    The Ph.D. programs affected are in clinical psychology, anthropology, human paleobiology, political science and mathematics.

    A university spokesperson attributed the pauses to financial difficulties.

    “Like many universities, we are taking a close look at how best to support our PhD programs while maintaining the highest standards in doctoral education in a difficult fiscal environment. Our recent actions do not reflect a long-term closure or suspension of programs,” the spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed in an email. “Rather, they represent a need to limit new commitments in order to ensure that we fully meet our funding commitments to continuing PhD students” in those five departments.

    Two faculty members told Inside Higher Ed that the university was also slashing the total number of Ph.D. packages across all departments within the Columbian College of Arts & Sciences. GWU did not respond to a question about those additional cuts.

    The suspensions follow other instances of high-profile institutions slashing admissions to Ph.D. programs due to budget concerns, including Boston University, the University of Chicago and Harvard University. In a recent Faculty Senate meeting, GWU president Ellen Granberg asked the university’s schools and divisions to prepare “budget contingency plans” amid declines in applications from international students, the student newspaper, The GW Hatchet, reported. International students accounted for about 13 percent of the institution’s enrollment this fall, a decrease from the previous year.

    Huynh-Nhu Le, who leads the clinical psychology Ph.D. program, said that faculty have been aware for a while that cuts might be coming. In addition to declines in international students, GWU has been a victim of the Trump administration’s research funding cuts. And the program’s cohort size was already shrinking; for fall 2025, the clinical psych Ph.D. admitted a record low three students, down from the typical eight or nine.

    But Le didn’t expect that the program would admit no new students for fall 2026. The pause came as a result of the College of Arts & Sciences allocating just two slots for its three doctoral psychology programs combined. Because the American Psychological Association requires a minimum number of students in a clinical psychology Ph.D. cohort to promote “professional socialization,” Le decided not to admit any this year.

    The decision is likely to have a “ripple effect” on GWU’s clinic, Le said, where first-year students typically perform vital duties like answering phones and conducting intake appointments.

    ‘Hoping It’s an Anomaly’

    Other departments had to make similarly difficult decisions. According to Joel Brewster Lewis, an associate mathematics professor and the director of the department’s graduate programs, annual Ph.D. funding packages are decided by the dean’s office. This year, the amount of funding available to the mathematics department was equivalent to the number of continuing Ph.D. students in the department, meaning there was no funding available for new students.

    “We as a department opted to continue their funding next year rather than defund them and run admissions on those packages,” Lewis wrote in an email.

    In the human paleobiology program, funding for an incoming Ph.D. student would have been available only if a current student graduated this summer, according to Alison Brooks, a professor in the anthropology department and a faculty member within the Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology. One student is on track to graduate this summer, she said, but by the time the department knows for sure, it would be too late to admit another student.

    GWU’s human paleobiology Ph.D. program is one of the most recognized at the institution, Brooks said. In a typical year, the program admits roughly three students.

    “We have very high numbers of graduates in tenure-track jobs and other prestigious positions. Two members of our small faculty are in the National Academy of Science and Medicine. And generally we get some funding every year to support research initiatives, in addition to outside funding, to carry on with what we do,” she said. “We’re not necessarily being singled out, but we’re not being preferred, either.”

    Le, of the clinical psychology Ph.D. program, said she hopes this year is just a “blip.”

    “It’s really unfortunate. It’s not only our program—I think other clinical programs in the U.S. are going through the same thing,” she said. “I’m hoping it’s an anomaly for this year.”

    Source link

  • New Accreditors, Civic Discourse Programs Win FIPSE Grants

    New Accreditors, Civic Discourse Programs Win FIPSE Grants

    The Education Department said late last year that the grant program, which has funded student success initiatives, would support projects related to accreditation reform, civil discourse, artificial intelligence and workforce training.

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images | Pete Kiehart for The Washington Post via Getty Images

    More than 70 colleges, universities, nonprofits and other organizations are sharing $169 million to advance a number of the Trump administration’s priorities.

    Those include accreditation reform, promoting civil discourse, short-term workforce training programs and advancing the use of artificial intelligence in higher education. The Education Department announced the grant competition in November and said Monday that it had awarded the funds, which have historically gone to programs that support student success.

    Colleges received funding to switch accreditors, start short-term programs that will be eligible for the new Workforce Pell program, hold workshops on constructive dialogue and support peer-to-peer engagement in civil dialogue.

    Just over $50 million apiece went to the AI, civil discourse and Workforce Pell priorities, while projects related to accreditation received nearly $15 million, according to an Inside Higher Ed analysis of department data. All the grants in this tranche are for four years.

    Two new accreditors planning to seek federal recognition—the Postsecondary Commission and the Commission for Public Higher Education Inc.—each received $1 million. The department also awarded $1 million to the University of Rochester for its plans to establish an accreditor focused on higher education certificate programs that serve students with intellectual disabilities, and another $1 million to Valley Forge Military College, which wants to create a new hybrid accrediting agency for military-aligned associate and certificate programs. (Valley Forge Military College is one of several institutions that have indicated interest in the Trump administration’s compact for higher education.)

    Meanwhile, Davidson College’s Institute for Public Good is getting nearly $4 million to create the Deliberative Citizenship Network across 100 colleges and universities, according to a news release. Among other goals, the network aims to train faculty and staff on how to facilitate forums on difficult topics and create teaching resources that can be widely shared.

    “With this funding, we will reach thousands of students and educators nationwide,” Chris Marsicano, executive director of the institute, said in a statement. “Davidson’s Institute for Public Good will serve as a national hub that connects research, teaching and public engagement around respectful inclusion across political viewpoints—no matter how unpopular on campus—as well as participating in community efforts to examine, talk through and solve big problems.”

    The department’s initial announcement about the awards didn’t provide specific information about the funded projects, but the agency briefly posted documents Monday afternoon outlining which institutions received awards and for how much. Inside Higher Ed captured some of that information before the documents were taken down and compiled the details into a searchable database below. A department spokesperson said the final documents should be posted next week.

    In the meantime, Inside Higher Ed reached out to the identified institutions for more information about how they plan to use the grant funding. The database will be updated as they respond.

    The grant money comes from the Fund for Improvement of Postsecondary Education, which has historically supported programs related to student success. Those include the Basic Needs, Veteran Student Success and Postsecondary Student Success programs. But in November, the Education Department announced plans to send the funds to a different special projects program—a move that Democrats and advocates criticized. Department officials say this round of funding, for which they “received a historic number of applications,” will help to support students through their academic journeys.

    “This historic investment will realign workforce programs with the labor market, break up the accreditation cartel and support institutions who want to change accreditors, and strengthen responsible use of AI in the classroom,” said Ellen Keast, a department spokesperson, in a statement. “These investments will open new, affordable higher education alternatives to American families, and we are very excited to see federal dollars driving change in the sector that is long overdue.”

    Some critics have raised concerns about the truncated grant-review process. Typically, the FIPSE grant competition opens in the spring and awards go out by Dec. 31, one former department official said. They also question who will administer the program moving forward. Like other higher ed grant programs, FIPSE is slated to move to the Labor Department under agreements announced late last year.

    Source link

  • Beyond DEI offices, colleges are dismantling all kinds of programs related to equity

    Beyond DEI offices, colleges are dismantling all kinds of programs related to equity

    by Jeni Hebert-Beirne, The Hechinger Report
    December 22, 2025

    It started with Harvard University. Then Notre Dame, Cornell, Ohio State University and the University of Michigan. 

    Colleges are racing to close or rename their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) offices, which serve as the institutional infrastructure to ensure fair opportunity and conditions for all. The pace is disorienting and getting worse: since last January, 181 colleges in all.  

    Often this comes with a formal announcement via mass email, whispering a watered-down name change that implies: “There is nothing to see here. The work will remain the same.” But renaming the offices is something to see, and it changes the work that can be done. 

    Colleges say the changes are needed to comply with last January’s White House executive orders to end “wasteful government DEI programs” and “illegal discrimination” and restore “merit-based opportunity,” prompting them to replace DEI with words like engagement, culture, community, opportunity and belonging. 

    One college went even further this month: The University of Alabama ended two student-run magazines because administrators perceived them to be targeting specific demographics and thus to be out of compliance with Attorney General Pamela Bondi’s anti-discrimination guidance. Students are fighting back while some experts say the move is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. 

    Related: Interested in innovations in higher education? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter. 

    With the one-year mark of the original disruptive executive orders approaching, the pattern of response is nearly always the same. Announcements of name changes are followed quickly by impassioned pronouncements that schools should “remain committed to our long-standing social justice mission.” 

    University administrators, faculty, students, supporters and alumni need to stand up and call attention to the risks of this widespread renaming.  

    True, there are risks to not complying. The U.S. State Department recently proposed to cut research funding to 38 elite universities in a public-private partnership for what the Trump administration perceived as DEI hiring practices. Universities removed from the partnership will be replaced by schools that the administration perceives to be more merit-based, such as Liberty University and Brigham Young University.  

    In addition to the freezing of critical research dollars, universities are being fined millions of dollars for hiring practices that use an equity lens — even though those practices are merit-based and ensure that all candidates are fairly evaluated.  

    Northwestern University recently paid $75 million to have research funding that had already been approved restored, while Columbia University paid $200 million. Make no mistake: This is extortion. 

    Some top university administrators have resigned under this pressure. Others seem to be deciding that changing the name of their equity office is cheaper than being extorted.  

    Many are clinging to the misguided notion that the name changes do not mean they are any less committed to their equity and justice-oriented missions.  

    As a long-standing faculty member of a major public university, I find this alarming. In what way does backing away from critical, specific language advance social justice missions? 

    In ceding ground on critical infrastructure that centers justice, the universities that are caving are violating a number of historian and author Timothy Snyder’s 20 lessons from the 20th century for fighting tyranny.  

    The first lesson is: “Do not obey in advance.” Many of these changes are not required. Rather, universities are making decisions to comply in advance in order to avoid potential future conflicts.  

    The second is: “Defend institutions.” The name changes and reorganizations convey that this infrastructure is not foundational to university work.  

    What Snyder doesn’t warn about is the loss of critical words that frame justice work.  

    The swift dismantling of the infrastructures that had been advancing social justice goals, especially those secured during the recent responses to racial injustice in the United States and the global pandemic, has been breathtaking.  

    Related: Trump administration cuts canceled this college student’s career start in politics 

    This is personal to me. Over the 15 years since I was hired as a professor and community health equity researcher at Chicago’s only public research institution, the university deepened its commitment to social justice by investing resources to address systemic inequities. 

    Directors were named, staff members hired. Missions were carefully curated. Funding mechanisms were announced to encourage work at the intersections of the roots of injustices. Award mechanisms were carefully worded to describe what excellence looks like in social justice work.  

    Now, one by one, this infrastructure is being deconstructed.  

    The University of Illinois Chicago leadership recently announced that the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Equity and Diversity will be renamed and reoriented as the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Engagement. The explanation noted that this change reflects a narrowed dual focus: engaging internally within the university community and externally with the City of Chicago. 

    This concept of university engagement efforts as two sides of one coin oversimplifies the complexity of the authentic, reciprocal relationship development required by the university to achieve equity goals.  

    As a community engagement scientist, I feel a major loss and unsettling alarm from the renaming of “Equity and Diversity” as “Engagement.” I’ve spent two decades doing justice-centered, community-based participatory research in Chicago neighborhoods with community members. It is doubtful that the work can remain authentic if administrators can’t stand up enough to keep the name. 

    As a professor of public health, I train graduate students on the importance of language and naming. For example, people in low-income neighborhoods are not inherently “at risk” for poor health but rather are exposed to conditions that impact their risk level and defy health equity. Health is “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being,” while health equity is “the state in which everyone has the chance to attain full health potential.” Changing the emphasis from health equity to health focuses the system’s lens on the individual and mutes population impact.  

    Similarly, changing the language around DEI offices is a huge deal. It is the beginning of the end. Pretending it is not is complicity.  

    Jeni Hebert-Beirne is a professor of Community Health Sciences at the University of Illinois Chicago School of Public Health and a public voices fellow of The OpEd Project. 

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected]. 

    This story about colleges and DEI was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter. 

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-colleges-are-not-just-saying-goodbye-to-dei-offices-they-are-dismantling-programs-that-assure-institutional-commitment-to-justice/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

    <img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=114031&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-colleges-are-not-just-saying-goodbye-to-dei-offices-they-are-dismantling-programs-that-assure-institutional-commitment-to-justice/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • Grad Programs Brace for Loan Caps

    Grad Programs Brace for Loan Caps

    Most of the colleges with the largest graduate programs in the country don’t have clear plans for how they’ll deal with new loan caps, set to kick in next July. And if they do, they aren’t taking publicly about it.

    For years, students could borrow essentially unlimited funds to pay for graduate education, thanks to a program known as Grad PLUS that capped loans at the cost of attendance. Republicans in Congress and other critics have argued that colleges took advantage of this program and raised their prices, fueling the student debt crisis. Loans for grad students make up nearly half of the federal loan portfolio.

    Along the way, colleges have begun to rely on graduate education to fund their university operations, higher ed experts say.

    But now that two-decade-old system is ending. Congress eliminated Grad PLUS over the summer and will cap how much students can borrow for graduate education. Lawmakers also limited Parent PLUS loans, which were also previously uncapped and offered families a way to make up the gap and pay for college. Both changes came out of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

    Beginning next summer, most graduate programs will have a federal loan cap of $100,000, with exceptions for a scaled-down number of professional programs with a limit set at $200,000. Those changes have created uncertainty for graduate schools and students who are navigating a changing landscape with fewer resources. Experts say graduate schools could face enrollment declines and some could shutter, thanks to the new limits.

    Even before the loan caps, graduate education was facing a reckoning, particularly after the Trump administration clamped down on federal research funding. Colleges paused graduate admissions for doctoral programs, and sometimes rescinded offers. Meanwhile, colleges are starting to rethink their approaches to humanities doctoral programs, among other shifts in this space.

    Planning for Change

    To better understand how universities are planning ahead, Inside Higher Ed reached out to 20 of the largest graduate programs in the nation. Most did not respond. Those that did emphasized a mix of increased corporate engagement and expanded loan options, among other measures.

    But for the most part, many appear to still be figuring it out.

    “We’re spending a lot of time this year looking at diversifying the streams of funding for graduate students,” said Bonnie Ferri, vice provost for graduate and postdoctoral education at Georgia Institute of Technology.

    Ferri noted that while Georgia Tech already has corporate partnerships that sponsor projects, which in turn help fund students, the university is doubling down on those efforts this year and “focusing on being more systematic” to spread those dollars across more graduate programs.

    At a recent University of Florida Board of Trustees meeting, Vice President and Chief Enrollment Strategist, Mary Parker, said UF will “have to figure out how to fill the gap for our students” as loan options diminish. She noted UF is rolling out Scholarship Universe, a tool to help students find internal and external scholarships. Parker said UF is also “looking at the expansion of our institution loan program” and the university will also help students identify private loan options.

    University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign spokesperson Patrick Wade told Inside Higher Ed by email that Illinois is still in the planning process and it is too early to share specific details. But Wade added that university officials “are directing units to begin developing contingency plans and to communicate proactively with current and prospective students, particularly in professionally oriented programs, where we expect recent changes to have the greatest impact.”

    Several other institutions said it was too early to share details about how they’ll fill loan gaps.

    Grad Enrollment Fallout

    Some experts believe the changes to federal loans will leave students scrambling.

    “I think when we get to July 1 next year, when these caps are scheduled to go into place, there will be a lot of students who are going to need to come up with another way of paying for graduate school than what’s been true in the past,” Jordan Matsudaira, director of the Postsecondary Education & Economics Research at American University, told Inside Higher Ed.

    Research led by Matsudaira projects that programs such as dentistry, osteopathy and medicine will be particularly squeezed by the changes.

    And given the many other pressures on university budgets, such as federal research funding challenges, federal efforts to limit international enrollment, and the looming demographic cliff, Matsudaira doesn’t expect universities to lower graduate tuition or significantly increase aid.

    “I just think institution budgets are going to be under so much pressure from so many different things that it is just incredibly optimistic thinking, bordering on fantasy, to believe that they’re going to come up with substantial sources of funding to be able to either cut their graduate school prices or be able to fund their own loan program to enroll students,” he said.

    (Some experts have suggested that states should get involved by providing low or no-interest loans as the Grad Plus loan option goes away.)

    Matsudaira expects a “very rough transition period over this coming year” for students. He also expects graduate enrollment to decline.

    “The question is how much does it reduce the number of students pursuing graduate school,” Matsudaira said.

    Private loans are one option students are likely to turn to. He believes private loans will surge, with the market growing from around $3 billion a year currently to $10 billion in the near future.

    But even private loans may prove difficult to obtain for some students.

    “If I had to make predictions, I would guess that private student loan providers will make loans available to students attending programs with a good track record of earnings and loan repayment, but it is less certain whether students in programs that tend to lead to lower earnings and/or worse loan repayment outcomes will be able to access private student loans,” Lesley Turner, an associate professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy, wrote by email.

    She added private loans will have “fewer protections and less flexibility in repayment terms.”

    Turner expects that the fallout of the changes to graduate school funding will not only decrease enrollment but may even prod some institutions to shutter such programs as headcount falls.

    Credit rating agencies have also taken a dim view of what the changes will mean.

    “Institutions with a greater proportion of graduate students will likely face more pronounced impacts from these policy changes, particularly if they serve disproportionately high levels of aid- and loan-dependent students,” Fitch Ratings concluded in its 2026 sector outlook, which it described as deteriorating. “While private loan providers can fill gaps created by federal limits, private offerings may nevertheless deter students, as private loans will likely be offered with less favorable rates and limited flexibility compared to what was available under federal programs.”

    Source link

  • Student retention programs that work – Campus Review

    Student retention programs that work – Campus Review

    Commentary

    Student attrition is rarely down to academic ability, it’s down to students not feeling settled yet, or being away from home for the first time

    James HolderDecember 10, 2025Last Updated: December 10, 2025

    0

    Some Australian universities handle student attrition rates very well, and model examples all institutions should undertake to retain students.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • Closing Equity Gaps in CTE Programs for Black Students

    Closing Equity Gaps in CTE Programs for Black Students

    Black students enroll in career and technical education programs at rates on par with their peers, but studies suggest they’re overrepresented in service-oriented fields that lead to lower-wage jobs, and less likely to participate in CTE courses in potentially lucrative STEM fields.

    A new research brief, released last week by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, delved into such inequities and explored possible solutions based on qualitative interviews with Black program staff, current and former CTE students, members of workforce development organizations, training providers, researchers, and other CTE experts. The authors argue those voices are especially critical when federal legislation funding the programs—the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act, or Perkins V—is poised for reauthorization in fiscal year 2026.

    The report pointed out that in the 2022–23 academic year, Black students made up about 13 percent of high school students and about 15 percent of college students in CTE programs. But a 2020 analysis of CTE data in 40 states by Hechinger Report and the Associated Press found that Black students were less likely than their white peers to enroll in courses focused on science, technology, engineering, math and information technology, and more likely to take classes in fields such as hospitality and human services.

    A 2021 report by the Urban Institute also found that compared to their white peers, Black students in CTE courses had significantly lower grade point averages, lower rates of earning credentials or degrees at their first colleges, and a lower likelihood of finding a job in a related field. On average, Black participants in these programs earned more than $8,200 less than white students six years after starting CTE programs, controlling for the highest degree attained and sector of study. Earnings gaps worsened for Black students in online CTE programs; Black students who enrolled in those earned less than half of what their white peers did, despite having started in the same program in the same year, eventually earning the same degrees.

    “These disparities are major barriers to increasing the earning potential of Black workers and learners and to narrowing the racial wealth divide,” Joint Center president Dedrick Asante-Muhammad said in a news release.

    Lessons Learned

    In interviews with the Joint Center, Black CTE experts shared insights into some of the challenges of providing more equitable CTE programs.

    Some emphasized that Black CTE teachers, and technical instructors in general, are hard to recruit and retain because they can make better salaries working industry jobs in their fields, leaving students without mentors who look like them. In general, the experts raised concerns about CTE instructors lacking professional development, including on culturally responsive teaching.

    The research brief also suggested that Black communities don’t always trust CTE programs because historically, schools funneled Black students into low-quality technical programs. CTE programs hold a stigma for some potential students who still view them as pathways for students of color considered unlikely to attend college rather than a viable career step that doesn’t preclude higher education, the brief said.

    Experts also noted that while Perkins V funds require states to submit a local needs assessment, which involves reviewing enrollment and performance data for CTE students, data collection varies across states and gaps in data too often serve students poorly. For example, the mandatory accountability measures for Perkins V funds require data on CTE concentrators—high school students who finished at least two courses in the same CTE program—but that doesn’t include college students or students who dabble in CTE but don’t qualify as a concentrator.

    Co-author of the brief and Joint Center workforce policy director Kayla Elliott also acknowledged that the Trump administration’s recent decision to shift management of CTE programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor creates new uncertainty for the programs.

    “This raises real concerns for the program’s effectiveness and the efficiency of support services for state administrators,” she said in the release. “Some states have already reported waiting months for their Perkins funding with little communication or support from the administration.”

    But CTE experts also said Perkins V funding is flexible in ways that can help support Black students. For example, states can use up to 15 percent of the federal funds to drive innovation and implement new programs. States can also combine Perkins V funding with other funding sources, like the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, which can help states better align CTE programs and workforce development programs. The funds can also be used for career exploration activities to introduce Black students to these programs.

    The research brief offered recommendations to improve Black student access and outcomes in CTE, including increasing federal funding during the next reauthorization; improving retention and recruitment strategies for Black CTE teachers, including by raising instructor wages; and enhancing data collection standards. The authors also suggested CTE programs better align with workforce development efforts at the state level and do more engagement and outreach to help Black families better understand how these programs can lead to high-earning technical careers.

    Source link