Tag: select

  • 2 flagship universities select leaders after abrupt resignations

    2 flagship universities select leaders after abrupt resignations

    The end of 2025 didn’t just usher in winter break but also major leadership changes.

    Two East Coast flagships, the University of Virginia and the University of Delaware, named new presidents, each of whom took office on Jan. 1. But UVA’s decision to name a president in December defied the wishes of Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger, potentially setting the stage for contentious relations between her and the university’s board.

    At least two religious institutions also announced leadership transitions last month, some making mid-academic year pivots.

    Below, we’re rounding up a selection of last month’s most notable college leadership changes.

    President: Brian Konkol
    Institution: Valparaiso University
    Coming or going? Coming

    Valparaiso University on Dec. 2 selected Brian Konkol as its new president. Konkol joins the Lutheran institution from Syracuse University, where he served as vice president, dean and professor.

    Konkol assumed the role on Jan. 1.

    Like many small religious institutions, Valparaiso’s finances have been shaky in recent years. 

    The university implemented a suite of cuts in 2024, eliminating over two dozen academic programs with low enrollment and nixing an undisclosed number of faculty positions. 

    Valparaiso’s last leader, José Padilla, said at the time that the cuts were “not solely a cost cutting initiative” and were also intended to “meet the expectations of our students and the demands of the market.” Six months later, Padilla announced he would resign when his contract expired on Dec. 31.

    S&P Global Ratings in May gave Valparaiso’s bonds a BB+ rating, which reflects some credit risk. The university’s attempt to sell $54 million in bonds faced delays, according to Bloomberg, but they went through in July.

     

    President: Kathleen Getz
    Institution: Mercyhurst University
    Coming or going? Going

    Mercyhurst University President Kathleen Getz will retire at the end of June, the Catholic institution announced Dec. 2.

    Under Getz, the Pennsylvania university served as a teach-out option for students who attended Notre Dame College of Ohio, a nearby religious institution that shuttered in 2024.

    Mercyhurst also moved up to NCAA’s Division 1. Getz said at the time that the transition would allow the small private college to collaborate and compete with “universities and athletic programs in new and larger markets.”

    The university also made staffing cuts, though they were less dramatic than those at other peer colleges. It cut five administrative and staff positions in June. Getz told the Erie Times-News that the cuts were not indicative of larger financial struggles at the university.

    Mercyhurst’s board selected David Livingston as the institution’s interim president for a term of two years, beginning when Getz steps down. Livingston is a former Mercyhurst faculty member and administrator who more recently led Lourdes and Lewis universities.

    President: Greg Cant
    Institution: Wilkes University
    Coming or going? Going

    Greg Cant will retire as Wilkes University’s president in August, per a Dec. 8 statement from the university.

    The announcement came just days after Cant informed university stakeholders that the private Pennsylvania institution had implemented a plan that had closed a roughly $7 million budget deficit.

    The deficit first became public knowledge when The Citizens’ Voice obtained a copy of an October letter to the campus community detailing the shortfall, which attributed it in part to a “breakdown in process” and “failure in leadership.” The projected gap followed a $2.8 million deficit the previous year that left officials “surprised,” according to The Citizens’ Voice.

    The university faced student protests in the fall demanding more transparency from administrators. Wilkes last month did not publicly share details about how it had addressed the budget gap, but a university spokesperson told The Citizens’ Voice it will “share any additional updates when they are available.”

    Effective immediately, Wilkes’ senior vice president and provost, David Ward, assumed the role of chief operating officer and provost “to support the University in this time of leadership transition,” the university said in its Dec. 8 release.

    President: James Clements
    Institution: Clemson University
    Coming or going? Going

    Clemson University President James Clements announced on Dec. 9 that he would retire at the end of the month, after leading the South Carolina institution for 12 years. The abrupt notice came after Clemson’s board approved a five-year contract extension for Clements in October 2024.

    The public research university has repeatedly been in the public eye over the last year, both for its financial woes and its responses to political pressure. 

    Clemson froze all spending that wasn’t “mission critical,” restricted employee travel and suspended hiring amid reports it needed to cut $63 million from its budget. According to an email shared with The Post and Courier, the university said it was not facing a deficit and no jobs were in danger.

    The university also froze its in-state tuition rate for undergraduates to secure more state funding.

    Source link

  • How to Select a Financial Advisor

    How to Select a Financial Advisor

    Did you know that just about any advisor can call themselves a financial planner even though they derive all of their income from sales commissions?

    It’s frustrating when I hear stories about “financial planners” who take advantage of families seeking reasonable advice and guidance. With so much industry jargon out there, it can be tough for families to determine which financial planner is right for them—and which firms are just trying to sell them a non-ideal product to make a commission.

    When looking for a financial advisor and planner, here are a few steps I recommend to determine whether or not they’re the right fit and whether they’ll have your best interests at heart.

    Empowerment Over Fear

    Are you hesitating because you’ve heard scary stories about financial planners? I’ve heard them too. I recently had a client share a story about a visit to a different advisor who used high-pressure sales tactics of fear and stress. The client literally left the office and cried all the way home.

    Your advisor should help you feel empowered — not afraid.

    Do They Consider Your Needs?

    Maybe this sounds like you: You have hit a point in your life when things are coming together. You are seeing success in your career. Your family is growing. You have a 401k for your retirement and 529 plans for your children. All is good. Why would you need a financial advisor when everything seems fine?

    Or maybe you’ve lost a parent. Many of us have experienced this or are about to, and according to the latest research from Cerulli Associates, an epic $84.4 trillion (and by some estimates up to $124 trillion) will be passed down from baby boomers to Generation X and millennials through 2045. What happens to their money after they are gone? Are you afraid to make a misstep?

    Perhaps you worry about retirement. Yes, you have a 401k, but is it enough? Could you be doing more? And then there is paying for college — likely the largest purchase you make besides your home. How will you get that done? What’s the best way to set your children up for long-term success?

    Your advisor needs to not only consider your current financial status and investments, but also look ahead to your future goals, needs, and dreams. 

    How to Pick a Financial Advisor Who Puts Your Interests First

    You will want to answer these questions to start:

    • What type of advisor are they? What is their fee structure, and can it influence the recommendations they give to you?
    • Do they have credentials valued by the industry, holding them to the highest standards of ethics and competency?
    • Is their expert knowledge a fit for your unique needs (like college funding or tax planning)?

    The Three Types of Advisors

    The types of financial advisors break down into three categories:

    1. The Broker or “Registered Representative”: Employed by broker-dealer companies. They earn fees based on portfolio value but can also sell products like annuities and mutual funds to collect commissions. They are, primarily, salespeople.
    2. The “Fee-Based” Advisor: Often associated with large brokerage firms. They collect an annual fee or a percentage of assets, but they also can collect commissions on products they sell to you. They often serve two masters: you and their brokerage firm.
    3. The Fiduciary (Fee-Only): Merriam-Webster defines fiduciary as “involving a confidence or trust.” These advisors must make recommendations in your best interest by law. They cannot earn commissions. They are often Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs) focused on education and long-term success. (This is the type of advisor you’ll find at Capstone Wealth Partners.)

    Check Their Credentials

    In an industry full of “alphabet soup” (CFP®, CIMA, CPWA, CFA, ChFC, etc.), the CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™ (CFP®) remains the gold standard for ethics and competency. But you should never take an advisor’s word for it. Verify them directly using the CFP Board’s Verification Tool.

    Find a Niche Expert

    Brokers are experts in products. Niche advisors are experts in people like you. While some focus on specific employee groups or doctors, at Capstone, our primary focus is on families with college-bound children.

    In today’s college planning landscape, you need an advisor who understands the nuances of the FAFSA Simplification Act and how it impacts your specific financial aid eligibility and tax strategy. A “generalist” might miss the thousands of dollars in savings that a college-planning specialist can uncover.

    Questions to Ask in Your First Meeting

    Here’s a quick rundown of the questions you should ask when you first meet a potential advisor and planner.

    • What is your planning process and how many meetings will we have?
    • Do you use technology (like client portals) to track progress?
    • Will you help me implement the plan, or just hand me a folder?
    • How do you stay updated on changing college-funding laws?

    As niche fiduciaries, Capstone takes great pride in our responsibility to deliver the best, individually tailored plans to families looking to save for college and beyond. If you’d like to find out if we’re the right fit for your family, please schedule some free time to meet with us and ask the questions above.

    Updated December 2025

    Source link

  • China Select Committee Launches AI Campaign with Legislation to Block CCP-Linked AI from U.S. Government Use

    China Select Committee Launches AI Campaign with Legislation to Block CCP-Linked AI from U.S. Government Use

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    June 25, 2025

    Contact:

    Alyssa Pettus

    Brian Benko

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — As the House Select Committee on the China opens its landmark hearing, “Authoritarians and Algorithms: Why U.S. AI Must Lead,” Committee leaders are unveiling new bipartisan legislation to confront the CCP’s growing exploitation of artificial intelligence.

    Chairman John Moolenaar (R-MI) and Ranking Member Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) today announced the House introduction of the “No Adversarial AI Act” bipartisan legislation also being championed in the Senate by Senators Rick Scott (R-FL) and Gary Peters (D-MI). The bill would prohibit U.S. executive agencies from acquiring or using artificial intelligence developed by companies tied to foreign adversaries like the Chinese Communist Party. The House legislation is cosponsored by a bipartisan group of Select Committee members, including Reps. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) and Darin LaHood (R-IL). 

     

    “We are in a new Cold War—and AI is the strategic technology at the center,” said Chairman Moolenaar. “The CCP doesn’t innovate—it steals, scales, and subverts. From IP theft and chip smuggling to embedding AI in surveillance and military platforms, the Chinese Communist Party is racing to weaponize this technology. We must draw a clear line: U.S. government systems cannot be powered by tools built to serve authoritarian interests.”

    What the No Adversarial AI Act Does:

    • Creates a public list of AI systems developed by foreign adversaries, maintained and updated by the Federal Acquisition Security Council.
    • Prohibits executive agencies from acquiring or using adversary-developed AI—except in narrow cases such as research, counterterrorism, or mission-critical needs.
    • Establishes a delisting process for companies that can demonstrate they are free from foreign adversary control or influence.

     

    “Artificial intelligence controlled by foreign adversaries poses a direct threat to our national security, our data, and our government operations,” said Ranking Member Raja Krishnamoorthi. “We cannot allow hostile regimes to embed their code in our most sensitive systems. This bipartisan legislation will create a clear firewall between foreign adversary AI and the U.S. government, protecting our institutions and the American people. Chinese, Russian, and other adversary AI systems simply do not belong on government devices, and certainly shouldn’t be entrusted with government data.”

    Senator Rick Scott said“The Communist Chinese regime will use any means necessary to spy, steal, and undermine the United States, and as AI technology advances, we must do more to protect our national security and stop adversarial regimes from using technology against us. With clear evidence that China can have access to U.S. user data on AI systems, it’s absolutely insane for our own federal agencies to be using these dangerous platforms and subject our government to Beijing’s control. Our No Adversarial AI Act will stop this direct threat to our national security and keep the American government’s sensitive data out of enemy hands.”

    The legislation marks a major action in the Select Committee’s AI campaign, which aims to secure U.S. AI supply chains, enforce robust export controls, and ensure American innovation does not fuel authoritarian surveillance or military systems abroad.

     

    Today’s hearing and legislation continues the series of new proposals and messaging the Committee will roll out this summer to confront the CCP’s exploitation of U.S. innovation and prevent American technology from fueling Beijing’s AI ambitions.

    Source link

  • Roundup of select spring university press titles (opinion)

    Roundup of select spring university press titles (opinion)

    Johns Hopkins University Press/MIT Press/University Press of Kentucky/Duke University Press/Princeton University Press/University of Minnesota Press/University of California Press

    More catalogs from university presses started arriving almost immediately after the last roundup of spring titles appeared—and in going through them, a couple of topical clusters of books struck me as notable. Here is a quick overview. Quoted passages come from material provided by the publishers.

    What do ant colonies, online subcultures, the publishing industry and the device you are using to read this all have in common? Each is, in some sense, a network embedded in still wider networks. They, like myriad other phenomena, can be depicted in geometric diagrams in which the components of a system (“vertices”) are connected by lines (“edges”) representing interactions or relationships.

    Researchers across many disciplines understand how systems and processes can be conceptualized as networks. The lay public, on the whole, does not. Anthony Bonato’s Dots and Lines: Hidden Networks in Social Media, AI, and Nature (Hopkins University Press, May) aims to bring nonspecialist readers up to speed on elements of the network perspective. Everything from “Bitcoin transactions to neural connections” and “political landscapes to climate patterns” can be mapped via dots and lines. The author’s use of demotic labels seems well-advised, given that “Vertices and Edges” seems much less commercially viable as a title.

    Some networks make it a priority to remain diagrammable, of course. Isak Ladegaard’s Open Secrecy: How Technology Empowers the Digital Underworld (University of California Press, May) looks into the “military-grade encryption, rerouting software, and cryptocurrencies” enabling “shadowy groups to organize collective action.” Examples include dark-web markets for illegal drugs, the activities of online hate groups and the efforts of Chinese citizens to remain connected to parts of the internet blocked by the Great Firewall. In each case, those running stealth networks “move through cyberspace like digital nomads, often with law enforcement and other powerful actors on their tails.”

    Leif Weatherby’s Language Machines: Cultural AI and the End of Remainder Humanism (University of Minnesota Press, June) offers “a new theory of meaning in language and computation” applicable to the production of texts by artificial intelligence based on large language models.

    Generative AI “does not simulate cognition, as widely believed,” he argues, “but rather creates culture” instead of just shuffling together fragments of it. (This is perhaps as good an occasion as any to issue my prediction that 2025 will see the first best-selling novel written by an AI algorithm.)

    On an altogether more dire note, Daniel Oberhaus’s The Silicon Shrink: How Artificial Intelligence Made the World an Asylum (MIT Press, February) warns that the use of AI in psychiatry has shown “vanishingly little evidence” of improving patient outcomes. The problem is not one of engineering but of programming: The algorithms incorporate “deeply flawed psychiatric models of mental disorder at unprecedented scale,” posing “significant risks to vulnerable people.”

    In old-school psychodynamic therapy, what’s said during the consultation does not leave the room. The author warns that a “psychiatric surveillance economy” is emerging, one “in which the emotions, behavior, and cognition of everyday people are subtly manipulated by psychologically savvy algorithms.”

    Doubling down on a strictly defined and vigilantly enforced understanding of sex and gender as binary is high on the MAGA cultural agenda. A few books out this spring insist on the ambiguities and complexities, even so.

    Agustín Fuentes offers perhaps the most basic challenge to traditional assumptions with Sex Is a Spectrum: The Biological Limits of the Binary (Princeton University Press, May). Arguing on the basis of recent scientific research, the book “explain[s] why the binary view of the sexes is fundamentally flawed,” with “compelling evidence from the fossil and archaeological record that attests to the diversity of our ancestors’ sexual bonds, gender roles, and family and community structures.”

    The ability to survive and thrive in unwelcoming circumstances is a focus of the writings collected in To Belong Here: A New Generation of Queer, Trans, and Two-Spirit Appalachian Writers (University Press of Kentucky, April), edited by Rae Garringer. The term “two-spirit” refers to a nonbinary gender category recognized among some Indigenous peoples in North America. Contributors discuss “themes of erasure, environmentalism, violence, kinship, racism, Indigeneity, queer love, and trans liberation” in Appalachia, exploring “the writers’ resilience in reconciling their complex and often contradictory connections to home.”

    Transgender philosophy is covered at some length in an entry recently added to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Talia Mae Bettcher, whose work figures prominently in the entry’s bibliography, continues her work in the field with Beyond Personhood (University of Minnesota Press, March), presenting “a theory of intimacy and distance” that proposes “an entirely new philosophical approach to trans experience, trans oppression, gender dysphoria, and the relationship between gender and identity.”

    Engineering and programming enter transgender studies’ already interdisciplinary ambit with Oliver L. Haimson’s Trans Technologies (MIT Press, February), which draws on the author’s “in-depth interviews with more than 100 creators of technology” for trans people, showing “how trans people often must rely on community, technology, and the combination of the two to meet their basic needs and challenges.” From the book’s description and the author’s published articles, it seems that the technology in question tends to be digital: social networks, games, extended reality systems (akin to virtual reality but with additional capacities). The book also considers the factors shaping, and in some cases restricting, innovation in trans tech.

    To close this list, there’s The Dream of a Common Movement (Duke University Press, April), a collection of writings by and interviews with Urvashi Vaid (1958–2022) edited by Jyotsna Vaid and Amy Hoffman. Urvashi Vaid was a feminist and a civil rights advocate whose work “over the course of four decades fundamentally shaped the LGBTQ movement.” Her perspective that “the goal of any liberation movement should be transformation, not assimilation” seems compatible with an older principle, which holds that an injury to one is an injury to all.

    Scott McLemee is Inside Higher Ed’s “Intellectual Affairs” columnist. He was a contributing editor at Lingua Franca magazine and a senior writer at The Chronicle of Higher Education before joining Inside Higher Ed in 2005.

    Source link