Tag: Role

  • Political Violence, Systemic Oppression, and the Role of Higher Education

    Political Violence, Systemic Oppression, and the Role of Higher Education

    The ambush shooting of two National Guardsmen near the White House on November 27, 2025, by Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national, is the latest in a growing wave of politically motivated violence that has engulfed the United States since 2024. Lakanwal opened fire on uniformed service members stationed for heightened security, wounding both. Federal authorities are investigating whether ideological motives drove the attack, which comes against a backdrop of escalating domestic and international tensions. This ambush cannot be understood in isolation. It is part of a larger pattern of domestic political violence that has claimed lives across ideological lines. 

    Conservative activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University during a campus event in September 2025. Minnesota state representative Mary Carlson and her husband were murdered in their home by a man impersonating law enforcement, while a state senator and spouse were injured in the same spree. Governor Josh Shapiro survived an arson attack on his residence earlier this year. Even Donald Trump was the target of an assassination attempt in July 2024. Added to this grim tally are incidents such as the 2025 Manhattan mass shooting, in which young professionals, including two Jewish women, Julia Hyman and Wesley LePatner, were killed, and the Luigi Mangione case, in which a former student allegedly killed a corporate executive in New York. Together, these incidents reveal a nation in which lethal violence increasingly intersects with politics, identity, and ideology.

    The domestic escalation of violence cannot be separated from broader structures of oppression. Migrants and asylum seekers face detention, family separation, and deportation under the authority of ICE, often in conditions described as inhumane, creating fear and vulnerability among refugee communities. Routine encounters with law enforcement disproportionately harm Black, Indigenous, Latinx, and other marginalized communities. Excessive force and lethal policing add to communal distrust, reinforcing perceptions that violence is a sanctioned tool of the state. Political rhetoric compounds the problem. President Trump and other political leaders have repeatedly framed immigrants, political opponents, and even students as threats to national security, implicitly legitimizing aggressive responses and providing fodder for extremist actors.

    The domestic situation is further complicated by U.S. foreign policy, which has often contributed to global instability while modeling the use of violence as an instrument of governance. In Palestine, military aid to Israel coincides with attacks on civilians and infrastructure that human-rights organizations describe as ethnic cleansing or genocide. In Venezuela, U.S. sanctions, threats, and proxy operations have intensified humanitarian crises and political instability. Complicity with the governments of the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Russia enables human-rights abuses abroad while emboldening domestic actors who mimic state-sanctioned violence. These global policies reverberate at home, influencing public discourse, shaping extremist narratives, and creating a climate in which political and ideological violence is increasingly normalized.

    Higher education sits at the nexus of these domestic and global pressures. Universities and colleges are not merely observers; they are active participants and, in some cases, victims. The assassination of Charlie Kirk on a campus underscores that institutions of learning are no longer insulated from lethal political conflict. Alumni, recent graduates, and professionals—such as the victims of the Manhattan shooting—are affected even after leaving school, revealing how closely academic networks intersect with broader societal risks. International and refugee students, particularly from Afghan and Middle Eastern communities, face heightened anxiety due to restrictive immigration policies, anti-immigrant rhetoric, and the real threat of violence. Faculty teaching topics related to immigration, race, U.S. foreign policy, or genocide are increasingly targeted by harassment, threats, and institutional pressures that suppress academic freedom. The cumulative stress of political violence, systemic oppression, and global conflicts creates trauma that universities must address comprehensively, both for students and faculty.

    Higher education cannot prevent every act of violence, nor can it resolve the nation’s deep political fractures. But it can model ethical and civic engagement, defending inquiry and speech without succumbing to fear or political pressure. It can extend support to vulnerable communities, promote critical thinking about the domestic roots of political violence and the consequences of U.S. foreign policy, and foster ethical reflection that counters the normalization of aggression. Silence or passivity risks complicity. Universities must recognize that the threats affecting campuses, alumni, and students are interconnected with broader systems of power and oppression, both domestic and global.

    From the White House ambush to Charlie Kirk’s assassination, from the Minnesota legislators’ murders to the Manhattan mass shooting, from Luigi Mangione’s high-profile killing to systemic violence enforced through ICE and police overreach, and amid the influence of incendiary political rhetoric and U.S. complicity in violence abroad, the United States is experiencing an unprecedented convergence of domestic and international pressures. Higher education sits at the center of these converging forces, and how it responds will shape not only campus safety and academic freedom but also the broader civic health of the nation. The challenge is immense: to uphold democratic values, protect communities, and educate students in a society increasingly defined by fear, extremism, and violence.


    Sources

    Reuters. “FBI probes gunman’s motives in ambush shooting of Guardsmen near White House.” The Guardian. Coverage on suspect identification and political reaction. AP News. Statements by national leaders following attacks. Washington Post. Analysis of domestic violent extremism and political violence trends. People Magazine. Reporting on Minnesota legislator assassination. NBC/AP. Statements by Gov. Josh Shapiro after Charlie Kirk’s killing. Utah Valley University and local ABC/Fox affiliates on the Kirk shooting. Jewish Journal, ABC7NY. Coverage of Manhattan mass shooting and Jewish victims. Reuters. Luigi Mangione case and court proceedings. Human Rights Watch / Amnesty International reports on Palestine, Venezuela, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. Brookings Institute. Analysis of political violence and domestic extremism. CSIS. “Domestic Extremism and Political Violence in the United States.”

    Source link

  • With News Decoder, students explore their role in the world

    With News Decoder, students explore their role in the world

    Back in 2020, during the height of the Covid epidemic, high school students in the U.S. state of Connecticut sat down with News Decoder founder Nelson Graves to explore a number of thorny topics that ranged from the death penalty to whether animals should be kept in zoos.

    The students in “American Voices & Choices: Ethics in Modern Society” at Westover School had been working with News Decoder since the start of that academic year, mastering the process we call Pitch, Report, Draft and Revise — or PRDR — to identify topical issues at the intersection of ethics and public policy.

    They pitched ideas they wanted to report on: teen health; police brutality; abortion; economic privilege in the environmental movement; the risks of experimental vaccines; the impact of alcohol on youth.

    Later, each student received detailed feedback from a News Decoder editor, aimed at helping them narrow their research and produce original reporting.

    Westover was an early News Decoder school partner. Since our founding 10 years ago, News Decoder has worked with high school and university students in 89 schools across 23 countries.

    Decoding news in school

    Teachers have used us as part of their course curricula, as extra credit assignments and as standalone learning opportunities for their students.

    At Realgymnasium Rämibühl Zürich in Switzerland, teacher Martin Bott brings News Decoder in each year. In one weeklong workshop, students produced podcasts. Over five days, they pitched News Decoder stories about a problem they identified in their local communities, identified an expert to interview, found how that problem was relevant to people in other countries and then wrote a podcast script, revised it and recorded it. “[News Decoder] enabled me to do a few projects which really open up perspectives for the students, give them a taste of life beyond the classroom and of the world of journalism,” Bott said. 

    In another workshop for RGZH, News Decoder turned students into “foreign correspondents.” They were tasked with finding stories in Zurich that people in other countries would find interesting. Like the students in the podcasting workshop, they then found an expert to interview, wrote a draft and revised it with the goal of publishing it on News Decoder. 

    One student in the workshop noticed a demonstration of people with dogs and got up the nerve to talk to one of them. They were from an organization that rescued Spanish greyhounds and she decided it would be a good idea for a News Decoder story. The story she wrote ended up as one of News Decoder’s most-read stories of all time.

    Not only have Bott’s students been able to publish stories on News Decoder, many of these stories, including the article about the greyhounds, have won awards in our twice yearly global storytelling competition. 

    “We’ve been delighted to get so many of those stories published on News Decoder,” Bott said. “That’s very, very motivating for the students. And it’s a wonderful learning process for them because they realise it’s not just about school rules and so on out there.”

    Challenging students to do more

    Bott said that working with professionals at News Decoder gets the students to step up. “When you’re a journalist, you’ve got a responsibility,” he said. “That’s something we’ve been able to talk about with journalists who’ve met us from various parts of the world through News Decoder. And you’ve got real pressure as well. And they’re not, I think they’re not quite used to that. So it really opens their eyes.”

    At The Hewitt School in New York, 15 teens at the all-girls school meet once a month as a club. They read and discuss News Decoder stories and pitch their own stories. They also prepare for a cross-border webinar; each year they join with students from a News Decoder partner school in another country, and decide with those students on a topic to explore. 

    They then research the topic, interview experts and come together with the students from the other school to present their findings live in a video conference before an audience of people from the two schools.

    In 2024, students from The Thacher School in California worked with peers at the European School of Brussels II on a webinar on consumerism and the human impacts of climate change. 

    Russell Spinney is faculty adviser for News Decoder at Thacher. “The webinars really were kind of ways just to get to know each other, discover that we actually do have some common interests. But not only that, that we also have problems that are similar,” he said. 

    “News Decoder’s workshops,” he said, “get students to think of ways to communicate their research beyond the classroom and connect with what’s going on in the world.” News Decoder has partnered schools this way in some 50 school-school webinars. 

    Source link

  • Higher education’s civic role has never been more important to get right

    Higher education’s civic role has never been more important to get right

    As the £4.3 million National Civic Impact Accelerator (NCIA) programme draws to a close in December, universities across the country are grappling with a fundamental question: what does sustainable civic engagement actually look like?

    After three years of momentum building and collective learning, I find myself observing the sector at a crossroads that feels both familiar and entirely new. The timing feels both urgent and opportune.

    The government’s renewed emphasis about universities’ civic role – most notably through Bridget Phillipson’s explicit call for institutions to “play a greater civic role in their communities” creates opportunity and expectation. Yet this arrives at a challenging time for universities, with 43 per cent of England’s institutions facing deficits this year.

    Despite this supportive policy context, I still find myself having conversations like, “but what exactly is civic?”, “is civic the right word?” or – most worryingly – “we can’t afford this anymore.”

    As universities face their most challenging financial circumstances in decades, we need to be bolder, clearer, and more precise about demonstrating our value to places and communities, across everything we do.

    Determination

    Instead of treating place-responsive work as a competition on some imagined league table or trying to redefine the term to fit the status quo, we need to come together to demonstrate our value to society collectively. But perhaps most importantly, we need to commit to reflect and do better despite the financial challenges.

    This isn’t about pinning down a narrow, one-size-fits-all definition and enforcing uniformity. Instead, it’s about recognising and valuing the diversity of place-responsive approaches seen across the country. From the University of Kent’s Right to Food programme to Anglia Ruskin University’s co-creation approach to voluntary student social impact projects. From Dundee’s Art at the Start project to support infant mental health and address inequalities, to how Birmingham City University is supporting local achievement of net-zero ambitions through their climate literacy bootcamps.

    Sometimes, it means making tough choices to reimagine how these valuable ways of working can be embedded across everything we do. Sometimes it means making this work visible, using a shared language to bring coherence – and crucially – committing, even in tough times, to honest reflection on our practice and a determination to keep improving.

    The waypoint moment

    I’ve found it helpful to describe civic engagement as an expedition. Most of us can imagine some kind of destination for our civic ambitions – perhaps obscured by clouds – with many paths before us, lots of different terrains, and a few hazards on the trail.

    Through the NCIA’s work – led by Sheffield Hallam University in partnership with the National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE), the Institute for Community Studies, City-REDI, and Queen Mary University of London – we’ve distilled three years of intensive evidence gathering and experimentation into fourteen practical “waypoints” for civic engagement, now launching as part of our Civic Field Guide (currently in Beta version).

    These aren’t just statements – they’re navigation signals based on well-trodden paths from fellow explorers. They come with a bespoke set of tools, ideas and options to deal with the terrain ahead.

    You can think of them like those reassuring signs on coastal walks. Helping you understand where you are and what direction you’re heading but giving you freedom to explore or take a detour.

    Take our waypoint on measuring civic impact. It encourages universities to develop evaluation systems that can document progress quantitatively, alongside the rich narratives that illustrate how civic initiatives transform real lives and strengthen community capacity. It draws on examples from universities that have tried to tackle this challenge, acknowledging both their successes and the obstacles they’ve encountered, whilst offering practical tools, frameworks and actionable guidance. But it deliberately avoids prescribing a one-size-fits-all measurement approach. Because every place has different needs, ambitions and challenges. Both the civic work itself and how we measure it must be tailored to the unique character of our places and communities.

    Our waypoints cover everything from embedding civic engagement as a core institutional mission to navigating complex policy landscapes. They address the “passion trap” that many of us might recognise, where civic work is reliant on a few individual champions rather than an institutional culture. They tackle issues of partnership development, cultivating active citizenship, and contributing to regional policymaking.

    Perhaps most importantly, they recognise that authentic civic engagement isn’t about universities doing things to or even for their places, it’s about embracing other anchor institutions, competitors, businesses and communities as equal partners throughout the entire process of identifying needs, designing solutions, and implementing change.

    This often means decentring the university from the relationship. Some of the strongest partnerships start with universities asking not “what can we do for you?” but “what are you already trying to achieve, and how might we contribute?”.

    The embedding challenge

    James Coe’s recent thoughts on how to save the civic agenda challenged us all to think about how universities move beyond “civic-washing” to genuine transformation. The NCIA’s evidence suggests the answer lies in weaving civic responsibility into everything we do, not just the obvious.

    Being civic means thinking about procurement policies that support local businesses. It means campus facilities genuinely accessible to community groups. It means research questions shaped by community priorities, not just academic curiosity. It means student placements that address local challenges whilst developing skills and confidence.

    Such as at the University of Derby. Their CivicLAB supports academics, students and the community to share insights on research and practice through a place-based approach to knowledge generation. Located centrally within the university, this interdisciplinary group cuts across research, innovation, teaching, and learning. Established in late 2020, CivicLAB has already created civic opportunities for over 14,600 staff, students and external stakeholders and members of the public.

    The civic question also means responding to the sceptics with evidence: demonstrating how place-based engagement creates richer contexts for research and more meaningful experiences for students; showing how equitable partnerships, far from distracting from core academic work, can actually enhance teaching and scholarship; and providing examples of how civic engagement has strengthened global excellence, helping local communities connect their priorities and assets to broader movements and opportunities.

    The future of civic engagement

    At CiviCon25 – our national, flagship conference which took place in Sheffield last month – we brought together civic university practitioners, engaged scholars, senior leaders and community partners to wrestle with the challenges that will shape the next decade of civic engagement.

    Our theme of “where ideas meet impact” captured something fundamental about our work: too often in higher education, brilliant ideas never quite make it into practice, or practice develops in isolation from the best thinking. We sometimes get stuck reinventing the wheel, endlessly debating definitions instead of delivering for our communities.

    But something different is happening now. A new generation of determined, ambitious civic universities are leading this movement forward, and I’ve been privileged to witness their journeys first-hand. They’ve been extraordinarily generous. Sharing what’s worked, being honest about setbacks, and helping others navigate the same challenges many of them faced alone. It’s their insights, experiments, and wisdom that have shaped the NCIA’s fourteen waypoints.

    As the NCIA draws to its scheduled conclusion, there’s something bittersweet about this moment. The infrastructure exists. The evidence is compelling. The policy environment has never been more supportive. But whatever happens next, we need to demonstrate our value to society collectively and commit to reflect and do better despite the financial challenges.

    The civic trail will always have its hazards. We’ve learned that much. But with good maps, experienced guides, and companions who share the commitment to reach the destination, these hazards become navigable challenges rather than insurmountable barriers.

    The fourteen waypoints offer the higher education sector a map and compass. Not every university need follow this path, but those that choose civic engagement as core mission must commit fully to the patient work of institutional change, equitable partnership building, and community-led impact.

    The trail is well marked now. The question is: who else will join the journey?

    Source link

  • The Expanding Role of Nurses in Rural Communities

    The Expanding Role of Nurses in Rural Communities

    Showcasing the opportunities offered as a nurse generalist has the potential to positively impact the recruitment and retention of nurses for rural communities.

    Rural nursing offers a unique and rewarding career path for nurse generalists who are seeking diverse experiences, greater autonomy, and the chance to make a meaningful impact in rural communities. Unlike nurses in urban or specialized settings, nurse generalists in rural areas often provide a wide range of services across the lifespan. 

    More experience and greater responsibility

    One of the most significant opportunities for nurse generalists in rural settings is the breadth of practice. In smaller, rural hospitals or clinics, nurse generalists are often required to work across multiple specialties such as pediatrics, geriatrics, emergency care, medical-surgical nursing, and women’s health, sometimes all within the same shift. This broad exposure allows nurses to build a versatile clinical skill set and develop confidence in managing a wide variety of conditions. For those who thrive on variety and lifelong learning, rural nursing can be deeply satisfying.

    Rural healthcare environments also often have fewer healthcare professionals available, which means nurse generalists frequently take on leadership roles and function with a high level of independence. Nurses may be responsible for initial assessments, treatment planning, health education, and follow-up care with less direct oversight from physicians. This autonomy not only builds critical thinking and decision-making skills but also prepares nurse generalists for advanced roles such as nurse practitioner, clinical leader, or rural health administrator.

    Connection, creativity, and compensation

    One of the most fulfilling aspects of rural nursing is the close connection to the community. Nurse generalists often serve patients they know personally, which fosters trust and long-term relationships. This community integration positions nurses as trusted health advocates, educators, and role models. The ability to see the direct impact of one’s work on individuals, families, and the community provides a unique level of professional and personal satisfaction that is sometimes harder to find in larger, urban settings.

    In rural settings, limited resources and workforce shortages often require creative problem-solving and innovation. Nurse generalists are uniquely positioned to influence care models by suggesting process improvements, initiating community health programs, or integrating technology such as telehealth into patient care. Rural healthcare organizations often welcome these innovations, and nurse generalists may find it easier to get involved in policymaking, grant writing, or quality improvement initiatives that have immediate and tangible results.

    Due to the challenges of attracting and retaining healthcare professionals in rural areas, many regions also offer incentives for nurse generalists willing to work in underserved locations. These may include loan forgiveness programs, housing stipends, relocation assistance, or sign-on bonuses. Additionally, the rural setting can provide a solid foundation for future advancement, whether through graduate education or leadership roles. The broad experience gained as a rural generalist is highly valued in both rural and urban healthcare systems.

    A dynamic and meaningful career

    While rural nursing does come with its challenges, such as professional isolation, limited resources, and fewer immediate specialist referrals, many nurse generalists find that these obstacles are outweighed by the deep sense of purpose and professional growth they experience. The need to be resourceful, adaptable, and compassionate often leads to a stronger sense of resilience and a deeper commitment to nursing as a vocation.

    For nurse generalists seeking a dynamic and meaningful career, rural nursing presents a wealth of opportunities. It allows for a diverse clinical practice, encourages leadership and autonomy, fosters deep community relationships, and offers avenues for personal and professional growth. Rural nurse generalists not only broaden their own skills and experiences but also contribute significantly to closing the healthcare gap in rural communities.

    Source link

  • President’s Role in the Enrollment Experience

    President’s Role in the Enrollment Experience

    Why Enrollment Should Be a Shared Institutional Priority

    The future hangs in the balance as enrollment management at your institution spirals into chaos. 

    Siloed growth initiatives are relegated solely to marketing departments, which bear the full weight of institutional pressure yet lack the authority to grow enrollment throughout the entire funnel. Overburdened marketing teams bombard campus stakeholders with complex, opaque data and demand astronomical digital marketing budgets that few truly understand. It’s just easier to say no. 

    Meanwhile, admissions teams and faculty pursue divergent, often conflicting strategies to recruit students, each operating in isolation with little coordination. 

    Student success teams, critical to retaining and supporting new enrollees, are entirely excluded from strategic discussions, leaving vital continuity efforts out of the equation. 

    As these disconnected forces collide, the institution risks a catastrophic decline in enrollment, eroding its mission and future viability — an unfolding crisis in which collaboration is abandoned and the system teeters on the brink of collapse.

    This isn’t the latest thriller from your favorite streaming platform but instead a worst-case scenario of what some higher education institutions face today. The only one who can save them? You, the university president.

    The President as Chief Enrollment Champion

    It would be easy to assume that enrollment success and growth are mandates of marketing, admissions, and student support teams, as they focus on enrollment key performance indicators (KPIs), customer relationship management (CRM) systems, return on investment (ROI), lead-to-enrollment (L2E), and other such tools and metrics. For many university presidents and leaders, the details of enrollment management success are often isolated from broader priorities, such as mission, strategy, and resource allocation, even if enrollment growth is mentioned in the strategic plan. 

    Enrollment success is the lifeblood of institutional stability. The president and provost set the tone, vision, and degree of urgency around enrollment success initiatives. Without executive involvement, schools and departments compete instead of collaborating, pitting enrollment management teams against each other in a crowded market. This approach can lead to silos, missed opportunities, and uneven accountability. At worst, this approach leads to finger-pointing and a cycle of frustration and disappointment across the president’s cabinet.

    While marketing and enrollment management teams are the frontline drivers of enrollment strategies, the ultimate success of growth and student satisfaction hinges on the strategic leadership of university presidents and provosts. Effective leadership necessitates active engagement and oversight to ensure that these efforts are successfully integrated into the university’s priority initiatives. 

    Strong executive involvement signals holistic institutional commitment. This helps break down barriers that can impede enrollment success and diminish the student enrollment experience, such as disconnects between the operational teams supporting enrollment management and the academic teams safeguarding quality, reputation, and ranking. 

    Here, we discuss why the university president must champion ambitious and responsible enrollment. We explore how executive leadership can ensure that enrollment efforts are appropriately resourced; aligned under a single vision; and integrated across governance, academics, operations, and administration to achieve the most compelling metrics: exceptional student experiences and outcomes.

    Ensuring Adequate Resources and Support

    One of the key ways presidents and provosts can bolster enrollment success is by ensuring that marketing, recruitment, and student success teams are sufficiently resourced. No one expects executive leadership to be in the weeds of enrollment management operations. 

    However, having a working understanding of digital marketing and how it differs from event-driven marketing (for example, enrollment fairs or conferences) can be helpful during budget allocation conversations for marketing campaigns. 

    Equally important is ensuring that faculty and enrollment management staff have access to training and development opportunities to stay current in a rapidly evolving field, which is full of new tools and approaches, as well as a diverse ecosystem of third-party support opportunities. Faculty and staff are on the front line of student engagement. Presidents and provosts can cultivate an environment of continuous professional development focused on inclusive teaching, technology integration, and student engagement strategies. Well-supported faculty and staff are more effective in creating positive learning environments that attract and retain students. 

    Finally, presidents and provosts should invest in a process for new academic program development that assesses whether programs meet market demand and provide graduates with specific professional outcomes. 

    When components such as the above are underfunded, efforts to increase enrollment and enhance the student experience are likely to falter over time.

    Leveraging Modern Data and Analytics

    Are enrollment management staff using outdated and siloed technology systems that require significant manual work to develop basic reporting and analysis? This is a critical area for institutional-level investment and support. 

    Data-driven decision-making is essential in today’s competitive enrollment environment. Presidents and provosts should champion investments in analytics platforms that provide insights into prospective students’ behaviors and indicate their likelihood of enrollment, academic performance, and postgraduation outcomes. 

    Using this data, enrollment management and academic leadership can tailor recruitment strategies, optimize academic pathways, and identify at-risk students early, enabling targeted interventions that improve retention and graduation rates.

    Championing a Student-Centric Institutional Culture

    At the heart of enrollment and student success is a culture that prioritizes the student journey, from initial inquiry through graduation and beyond. While the traditional student journey may be well understood, that of the adult and online learner may require special analysis and support. 

    Presidents and provosts must champion this student-first culture by fostering collaboration across academic units, student services, and administrative departments, ensuring that every touchpoint enhances the student experience for all types of learners. 

    Establish Intentional Governance for Enrollment Success With Shared Performance Metrics 

    Enrollment growth and student success are inherently cross-functional. Presidents and provosts can foster collaboration by establishing formal structures with the authority to act, such as integrated enrollment planning committees or task forces that bring together academic leadership, student affairs, admissions, marketing, and technology teams. This helps align cabinet-level leaders around a unified enrollment vision. 

    These cross-functional collaborations ensure that strategies are coordinated, data-driven, and responsive to emerging trends. For example, aligning ambitious enrollment growth plans with course section scheduling and staffing planning ensures responsible outcomes, rather than having faculty leaders scramble at the last minute to find instructors to cover overfull admitted-student course sections.

    To ensure sustained focus, presidents and provosts should embed enrollment growth and student experience metrics into the university’s performance evaluations. This reinforces their importance across the institution and encourages all units to align their priorities accordingly. Shared accountability metrics should measure success from inquiry through graduation and be accessible to all teams through executive dashboards and regular reviews.

    Promoting Innovation and Building External Partnerships

    Staying competitive requires ongoing innovation and connection to the broader marketplace. Presidential and provost leadership should support the development of flexible academic pathways, such as online or hybrid programs, competency-based education, and microcredentials that appeal to diverse student populations. 

    Partnerships with industry, community organizations, and alumni can keep academic programs and curricula relevant, expand opportunities for students, and enhance the institution’s reputation. Presidents and provosts can lead efforts to establish these collaborations, opening pathways for internships, research projects, and employment while keeping a finger on the pulse of evolving industry and workforce skills needs and gaps.

    Demonstrating Visible Leadership and Accountability

    Finally, effective presidents and provosts demonstrate visible leadership by regularly communicating progress, celebrating successes, and holding units accountable for results. Transparent reporting on enrollment trends, student satisfaction, and graduation rates fosters a culture of continuous improvement. Training everyone to understand the basic KPIs that connect marketing, admissions, academics, and retention ensures that all are speaking the same language and working in partnership.

    Key Takeaways

    The strategic leadership of university presidents and provosts is essential for sustainable enrollment growth and a high-quality student enrollment experience. By actively championing student-centric culture, ensuring appropriate resourcing, fostering aligned governance and collaboration, leveraging data, and embedding metrics into institutional goals, executive leaders can create an environment where enrollment strategies are not only initiatives but also integral components of the university’s shared mission, leading to higher retention; better outcomes; and a stronger, more competitive institution.

    Increase Leadership’s Role in Your Enrollment Experience

    Archer Education partners with institutional leaders and admissions, marketing, and strategy teams to help them overcome enrollment challenges. Using tech-enabled, personalized enrollment marketing and management solutions, we can help your institution align its teams and create a strategic roadmap to sustainable growth. 

    Click here to request more information about Archer’s full-funnel engagement strategies and digital student experience technology.

    Source link

  • Elon University AAUP demands larger faculty role in Queens University combination

    Elon University AAUP demands larger faculty role in Queens University combination

    Dive Brief:

    • Elon University’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors is seeking more faculty involvement in the merger process as the institution looks to take over Queens University of Charlotte.
    • In a statement Wednesday, the group described faculty as being blindsided by the merger announcement in September and left out of the planning process. They called for faculty to elect representatives on integration teams and for officials to formally include of the universities’ faculty councils in merger advising. 
    • The Elon AAUP also said faculty should have a role in deciding whether to formally approve the merger. The two private nonprofits expect their boards to approve final parameters in November.

    Dive Insight:

    Elon and Queens, about 115 miles away from each other in North Carolina, said last month that their combination “creates new advantages of scale, bringing together resources, faculty expertise, research capacity and student services across both universities.”

    They also said their merger would accelerate the creation of new programs meant to address the Charlotte area’s workforce needs, such as a growing shortage of nurse practitioners, physician assistants and lawyers and a rising demand for graduate offerings.

    Since that announcement, Elon has said hundreds of employees, students and other stakeholders have attended town hall events about the combination and listening sessions and that officials are using their feedback to shape the plan. It has also seen public pushback from faculty, students and alumni.

    Faculty feedback has been “important to the extensive work of a team with representatives of both campuses discussing questions related to the academics, operations, and programming of a merged institution,” the university said Thursday in an emailed statement.

    But the university’s AAUP chapter said faculty need a larger, more formal role in the process.

    “Shared governance is not a courtesy; it is a cornerstone of higher education and a safeguard for academic quality,” the faculty group said in its statement, which was published by Elon’s student news organization. “It only functions when faculty are partners in major institutional decisions.”

    The chapter said officials didn’t consult with Elon’s academic council before the merger announcement. That’s despite stipulations in the university’s faculty handbook for the council to “advise the President on the setting of priorities and the planning of long-range goals for the University.”

    Going forward, Elon’s AAUP called for a “meaningful” advisory role for the full council and its Queens counterpart on the combination. They acknowledged scheduled meetings that included the chairs of those bodies, but the Elon AAUP pushed for the full involvement of the councils.

    With a fleshed-out merger plan still to be approved, the Elon AAUP is pressing for faculty to have a say in the ultimate decision. 

    “If faculty will be called upon to help make the merger a success, then faculty should be included in the decision of both institutions to move forward with the merger,” the group said. 

    In its Thursday statement, the university said, “There have been, and will continue to be, opportunities for Elon faculty, in their individual capacities and through involvement with Elon’s Academic Council, to participate in strategic conversations as work progresses toward a final decision by the boards of trustees of Elon and Queens.”

    Elon is the larger institution of the two, with 7,207 students in fall 2023, an increase of 3.1% from 2018. Queen’s fall 2023 headcount of 1,846 students was a 27.2% decline from five years earlier.

    Elon is also on firmer financial footing. It had $1.2 billion in assets in fiscal 2024, more than three times that of Queens. That year, Elon logged a $70.4 million operating surplus while Queens reported an $8.7 million deficit. However, in a FAQ page on the merger, the universities said that the combination plan is “not driven by crisis.”

    Source link

  • The Next System Teach-Ins and Their Role in Higher Education

    The Next System Teach-Ins and Their Role in Higher Education

    In a time when higher education grapples with systemic challenges—rising tuition, debt burdens, underfunding, and institutional inertia—the Next System Teach-Ins emerge as a powerful catalyst for critical dialogue, community engagement, and transformative thinking.


    A Legacy of Teach-Ins: From Vietnam to System Change

    Teach-ins have long functioned as dynamic forums that transcend mere lecturing, incorporating participatory dialogue and strategic action. The concept originated in March 1965 at the University of Michigan in direct protest of the Vietnam War; faculty and students stayed up all night, creating an intellectual and activist space that sparked over 100 similar events in that year alone.

    This model evolved through the decades—fueling the environmental, civil rights, and anti-apartheid movements of the 1970s and 1980s, followed by the Democracy Teach-Ins of the 1990s which challenged corporate influence in universities and energized anti-sweatshop activism. Later waves during Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter sustained teach-ins as a tool for inclusive dialogue and resistance.


    The Next System Teach-Ins: Vision, Scope, and Impact

    Vision and Purpose

    Launched in Spring 2016, the Next System Teach-Ins aimed to broaden public awareness of systemic alternatives to capitalism—ranging from worker cooperatives and community land trusts to decentralized energy systems and democratic public banking.

    These teach-ins were designed not just as academic discussion forums but as launching pads for community-led action, connecting participants with toolkits, facilitation guides, ready-made curricula, and resources to design their own events.

    Highlights of the Inaugural Wave

    In early 2016, notable teach-ins took place across the U.S.—from Madison and New York City to Seattle and beyond. Participants explored pressing questions such as, “What comes after capitalism?” and “How can communities co-design alternatives that are just, sustainable, and democratic?”

    These gatherings showcased a blend of plenaries, interactive workshops, radio segments, and “wall-to-wall” organizing strategies—mobilizing participants beyond attendee numbers into collective engagement.

    Resources and Capacity Building

    Organizers were provided with a wealth of support materials including modular curriculum, templates for publicity and RFPs, event agendas, speaker lists, and online infrastructure to manage RSVPs and share media.

    The goal was dual: ignite a nationwide conversation on alternative systemic models, and encourage each teach-in host to aim for a specific local outcome—whether that be a campus campaign, curriculum integration, or forming ongoing community groups.


    2025: Renewed Momentum

    The Next System initiative has evolved. According to a May 2025 update from George Mason University’s Next System Studies, a new wave of Next System Teach-Ins is scheduled for November 1–16, 2025.

    This iteration amplifies the original mission: confronting interconnected social, ecological, political, and economic crises by gathering diverse communities—on campuses, in union halls, or public spaces—to rethink, redesign, and rebuild toward a more equitable and sustainable future.


    Why This Matters for Higher Education (HEI’s Perspective)

    Teach-ins revitalize civic engagement on campus by reasserting higher education’s role as an engine of critical thought and imagination.

    They integrate scholarship and practice, uniting theory with actionable strategies—from economic democracy to ecological regeneration—and enrich academic purpose with real-world relevance.

    They also mobilize institutional infrastructure, offering student-led exploration of systemic change without requiring prohibitive resources.

    By linking the global and the local, teach-ins equip universities to address both planetary crises and campus-specific challenges.

    Most importantly, they trigger systemic dialogue, pushing past complacency and fostering a new generation of system-thinking leaders.


    Looking Ahead: Institutional Opportunities

    • Host a Teach-In – Whether a focused film screening, interdisciplinary workshop, or full-scale weekend event, universities can leverage Next System resources to design context-sensitive, action-oriented programs.

    • Embed in Curriculum – The modular material—especially case studies on democratic economics, energy justice, or communal models—can integrate into courses in sociology, environmental studies, governance, and beyond.

    • Forge Community Partnerships – By extending beyond campus (to community centers, labor unions, public libraries), teach-ins expand access and deepen impact.

    • Contribute to a National Movement – University participation in the November 2025 wave positions institutions as active contributors to a growing ecosystem of systemic transformation.


    A Bold Experiment

    The Next System Teach-Ins represent a bold experiment in higher education’s engagement with systemic change. Combining rich traditions of activism with pragmatic tools for contemporary challenges, these initiatives offer HEI a blueprint for meaningful civic education, collaborative inquiry, and institutional transformation.

    As the 2025 wave approaches, universities have a timely opportunity to be centers of both reflection and action in building the next system we all need.


    Sources

    Source link

  • New HEPI Policy Note: Universities’ role in global conflict

    New HEPI Policy Note: Universities’ role in global conflict

    Author:
    HEPI

    Published:

    With the UK Government moving to a posture of ‘war fighting readiness’ amid intensifying global conflict, a new HEPI Policy Note warns higher education remains an untapped asset in national preparedness.

    The Wartime University: The role of Higher Education in Civil Readiness by Gary Fisher argues UK universities must be recognised as central pillars of national security and resilience. The paper highlights how higher education institutions represent a ‘composite capability’ to enhance and sustain civil readiness, spanning defence, health, skills, logistics and democratic continuity, but warns this potential remains under-recognised and poorly integrated into emergency planning frameworks.

    You can read the press release and access the full report here.

    Source link

  • How Gov. Shapiro’s role at Penn puts free speech and institutional autonomy at risk

    How Gov. Shapiro’s role at Penn puts free speech and institutional autonomy at risk

    Nearly two years ago, the Hamas-led October 7 attacks on Israel and Israel’s subsequent invasion of Gaza sparked intense debate and demonstrations on American campuses. 

    Many schools responded by attempting to censor controversial but protected speech in the name of combating antisemitism. But in testimony before Congress on Dec. 5, 2023, University of Pennsylvania’s then-President Liz Magill initially declined to follow suit. She explained that “calling for genocide” does not always violate Penn’s rules. Instead, she correctly labeled this a “context-dependent decision,” recognizing that rhetoric some find deeply offensive can still be protected speech. This assertion was in line with Penn’s longstanding — but often ignored — commitment to tracking the First Amendment in its own policies.

    Unfortunately, Magill quickly backtracked in the face of public criticism, including from Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. The governor said publicly that Magill needed to “give a one-word answer” and that her testimony demonstrated a “failure of leadership.”

    As it turns out, the governor’s response was not limited to his public comments. Recent reporting by The Chronicle of Higher Education reveals how Gov. Shapiro’s office enmeshed itself in this controversy and in Penn’s response to antisemitism on campus in the months and semester that followed October 7.

    Seizing on a rarely used provision of the Penn Statutes of the Trustees that establishes the governor as a trustee ex officio, Gov. Shapiro appointed Philadelphia lawyer Robb Fox as his observer to the board of trustees. Gov. Shapiro’s director of external affairs Amanda Warren explained in a then-private email that Fox would be “integrated into all future board meetings, as well as ongoing antisemitism work, on behalf of the Governor.” Fox was previously part of the governor’s transition team in 2022 and serves as his appointee on the board of SEPTA, Philadelphia’s transit authority.

    Per the Chronicle, Fox “quickly immersed himself in Penn’s affairs — arguing technicalities of the board of trustee’s rules, liaising with students, faculty, and administrators, and contributing to Penn’s task force on antisemitism.” He began corresponding with Marc Rowan, who serves as chair of the Penn Wharton School’s board of advisors and was an early critic of both Magill and Bok. And in one early email regarding a proposed statement from the board, Fox said he would tell them “enough with the statements” and that they needed “a vote on board chair [Scott Bok] and president remaining.”

    Days later, Magill and Bok resigned. A member of Penn’s School of Arts and Sciences’ board later thanked Fox for this early engagement, saying the trustees were able to oust Magill and Bok “with the governor’s nudge and with his support.”

    All of this broke with precedent. Historically, Penn did not allow designees to attend board meetings in the governor’s place. The university only broke with this tradition after “many conversations between the Governor, President Magill, Board leadership, and staff.”

    Fox’s influence reportedly expanded in the months that followed. Penn’s then-interim President Larry Jameson intervened to add Fox to the university’s antisemitism task force. One member of the task force told the Chronicle that Fox frequently said he was trying to represent the governor’s position. And when Fox got the impression that the task force was trying to treat him as a mere spectator, he reached out to Warren and declared that he would “not be an observer.”

    Throughout all this, Fox and Warren frequently acted as a team. She connected him with Rowan in the early days of his appointment, and later connected him with the Penn Israel Public Affairs Committee. Fox and Warren were both part of an email exchange with Penn’s new board chair that sought information about the burgeoning encampment. And when Fox considered bypassing the task force on antisemitism and going directly to President Jameson to address an Instagram post by a pro-Palestine student organization, he first emailed Warren to discuss the issue with her.

    Neither Penn nor Gov. Shapiro’s office deny any of this involvement. Indeed, both parties acknowledged their relationship in comments to the Chronicle, with Gov. Shapiro’s spokesperson explaining that they and Fox intervened in order to combat hate and antisemitism.

    State pressure on private universities can be a dangerous backdoor to censorship

    Combating unlawful antisemitic harassment is a noble goal, but when powerful public officials wield their influence to regulate speech at private universities, they’re playing a dangerous game. We saw this play out recently at Columbia University, where university leaders responded to the Trump administration’s unlawful funding freeze (purportedly a response to campus antisemitism) by capitulating to demands that will chill protected speech. 

    Columbia incorporated the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s overbroad definition of antisemitism, which the Trump administration had earlier demanded, into its own definition. Later, in a settlement agreement it signed to restore government funding, Columbia required students to commit to vague goals like “equality and respect” that leave far too much room for abuse, much like the DEI statementscivility oaths, and other types of compelled speech FIRE has long opposed.

    Gov. Shapiro’s intervention here is not nearly as heavy-handed, but it is still cause for concern. If the Chronicle’s reporting is accurate, then he and his office must act with greater restraint given the state’s influence over Penn, a private institution, and the potential for overreach.

    The Chronicle notes that when President Jameson took office, Penn was working to reclaim $31 million in funding for its veterinary school and $1.8 million designated for the Penn Medicine Division of Infectious Diseases that had been withheld by the Pennsylvania legislature over antisemitism concerns. When faced with the loss of so much funding, many institutions, even those as wealthy as Penn, will be quick to fall in line with the state’s demands.

    This backdoor approach to regulating speech, known as jawboning, is both incredibly powerful and uniquely dangerous. The First Amendment only protects against state censorship, not private regulation of speech, so when the state pressures private institutions into censoring disfavored speech, it blurs the legal line between unconstitutional state action and protected private conduct. The Supreme Court unanimously condemned this practice in NRA v. Vullo, reaffirming its 60-year-old ruling that governments cannot use third parties to censor speech they disfavor. The Court explained that this practice would allow a government official to “do indirectly what she is barred from doing directly.” 

    Jawboning’s chilling effects go beyond the pressured institution itself. For example, Gov. Shapiro’s close involvement at Penn incentivizes campus leaders to over-enforce their anti-discrimination and harassment policies in ways that prohibit or chill what would otherwise be lawful speech. Rather than risk state interference, many institutions will censor first and ask questions later.

    None of this is to say that Penn has a sterling history when it comes to managing speech controversies on its own. In fact, Penn finished second to last in FIRE’s 2023 campus free speech rankings. But the situation is likely to get worse, not better, when the government amplifies the impulse to censor.

    Transparency limitations at private universities amplify the risks of state involvement

    Private universities are not subject to open-records laws like many public universities. At a public university, it is often possible to obtain records that reveal how or why the school changed a speech policy or engaged in censorship. By contrast, at a private university there is no formal way (besides the costly process of litigation) to request records that reveal the basis for such actions, including the extent to which they were the result of state pressure.

    For example, after Penn’s tumultuous 2024 spring semester, the university adopted a vague and overbroad events and demonstrations policy. This policy prohibits “advocat[ing] violence” in all circumstances, even when it doesn’t cross the line into unprotected and unlawful conduct or speech, like incitement or true threats. Moreover, the policy fails to define “advocat[ing] violence.” This leaves students guessing and will lead to administrative abuse and uneven enforcement. Is the common but controversial slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” a call for violence in Israel or a call for political change? Calling for U.S. bombing of terrorist groups like ISIS or Al-Qaeda is explicitly advocating violence. Is that prohibited? Under Penn’s new policy, that’s left to administrators to decide. 

    FIRE criticized this policy at the time and expressed concern that it was driven in part by viewpoint discrimination. But at a private university like Penn, there is no public records mechanism for the public to scrutinize how or why the policy was adopted. And although private universities are generally well within their rights to keep these decisions private, this arrangement becomes more troublesome when the state gets involved.

    Private universities have their own free speech rights

    Private universities themselves have free speech rights. A federal district court recently reiterated as much, explaining that the Trump administration violated the First Amendment when it conditioned funding to Harvard on the university “realigning its campus to better reflect a viewpoint favored by the government.” 

    Harvard, like Columbia and many other institutions, has been the target of a federal pressure campaign purportedly aimed at combatting antisemitism. But unlike Columbia, Harvard chose to defend its rights in court. This stand is praiseworthy, and the district court’s decision shows that private institutions stand on solid legal ground when they resist unlawful government pressure. Unfortunately, not every institution will be bold enough, or sufficiently well resourced, to fight the state in court.

    State actors should protect students by enforcing the law, not by censoring protected speech

    Given these dangers, Gov. Shapiro and other government actors seeking to combat discrimination must act through the proper legal channels. In the federal context, this means following the procedures laid out by Title VI and binding federal regulations. In its ruling for Harvard, the district court explained that this process is designed to ensure that recipients of federal funding “are shielded against being labeled with the ‘irreversible stigma’ of ‘discriminator’ until a certain level of agency process has determined that there was misconduct that warranted termination.” In other words, this process is a check on government overreach and all the harms that entails. The same principle applies to states trying to combat discrimination within their borders.

    Enforcing valid anti-discrimination laws is important. But there’s a significant danger when state actors attempt to use the rationale of anti-discrimination to regulate speech at private universities. If left unchecked, this backdoor regulation risks turning private universities into de facto extensions of the state — undermining both academic freedom and the First Amendment itself.

    Source link