Tag: students

  • Students Learn to Talk With Strangers

    Students Learn to Talk With Strangers

    Higher education is designed to be a space for open inquiry and disagreement, but encouraging students to engage in constructive dialogue can be a challenge.

    A January survey by the American Association of Colleges and Universities found that a majority of faculty believe they should intentionally invite student perspectives from all sides of an issue, and that they encourage mutually respectful disagreement among students in their courses.

    Students, however, are less likely to say that they’re exercising these muscles. A 2022 survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression found that 63 percent of students felt too intimidated to share their ideas, opinions or beliefs in class because they were different than those of their peers. About 84 percent of respondents agreed that students need to be better educated on the value of free speech and the diversity of opinion on campus.

    A course at the Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies at the University of San Diego pushed master’s students out of their comfort zone by engaging them in challenging and vulnerable conversations. The class, Crossing the Divide, taught by Sarah Federman, associate professor of conflict resolution, took nine students on a two-week trip across the southern U.S. in May 2024, starting in California and ending in Washington, D.C. Throughout the journey, students visited historic sites, interacted with strangers, discussed polarizing topics and learned to develop empathy across differences.

    In this episode of Voices of Student Success, host Ashley Mowreader spoke with Federman to learn more about her class, the trip and some of the lessons she learned about engaging students in constructive dialogue.

    An edited version of the podcast appears below.

    Q: We are talking today about a course that you created that is designed to help students create connections during polarizing times. I wonder if you can back us up to the genesis of this course and where the idea originally came from.

    Sarah Federman, associate professor of conflict resolution at the Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies, University of San Diego

    A: Sure. So I had been working on a book about the French National Railways, its role in the Holocaust and how it tried to make amends. I won this Amtrak writing residency—which doesn’t exist anymore, which is a big tragedy; I hope they start it again.

    I got to crisscross the United States on a train while editing the book. And I didn’t really get much editing done, because it was so much fun just seeing the country, binge-watching the country, talking to strangers, getting off at the stops. And I thought, oh, man, if I ever have a chance to teach—because I didn’t have a teaching job at that point—I was like, I want to pick everybody on the train. This would be the best classroom. So that’s where the idea came from.

    Q: Why a train specifically? There are a lot of ways to get across the U.S., and our rail system isn’t the best compared to some other nations. Why was it so inspiring to use the train?

    A: I don’t know if you’ve noticed how loud flights are. I put in my earplugs because it’s so loud, if you even wanted to talk to somebody—and you only have the person next to you. You’re trying to decide if you want to talk to this person for six hours or not. It’s much more closed, and you can’t see much for most of the flight, so that doesn’t really allow the kind of socialization and visibility, although you do get to see below you and the sense of what you’re flying over.

    The car, you just have your road buddies, so maybe you’ll talk to people at a gas station or a restaurant or an electric charging station, but you can choose not to. But people who go on the train for these longer trips have chosen it for the experience, and so there’s an openness and an adventure attitude that makes people really friendly. So that’s why train.

    Our trains are not fast. We don’t have high-speed trains, so you see the country kind of slowly, which is actually really nice. You roll by towns, and you get to think about the people. In France, you know, you go by so fast you can barely see anybody you know, because your eyes are like [darting].

    Q: That’s awesome. Tell me about the course design when it came to building this and mapping out, literally, where you wanted students to go.

    A: I actually hired a student to help me. We spent a year and a half planning this trip, because the trains stop at weird times—like, we really wanted to go to Yuma, for example, but the train arrived there at 3 a.m.; we’re not gonna arrive at 3 a.m. So we had to pick some of [the destinations] based on when the trains left, and also what we could do in these different sites and how different they would be, one from the other, and how different they would be for the students. Like, what would be the most different we could expose you to? So those were all the things we had in mind.

    We started in San Diego, and we took a train up to Los Angeles—and that train is amazing. You just watch surfers and dolphins, all the way up to L.A., and then there were all these people on the train. So we talked to those strangers. And then L.A., Tucson, Houston, New Orleans, Birmingham, took a stop in Montgomery, and then D.C., where we ended in front of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence [at the National Archives]. But in each of those stops, we [got] off and went to smaller places.

    Q: When it came to preparing students to engage with others, what kinds of conversations were you hoping they had? Was there any sort of guidance on how to engage with other people?

    A: [The students] were most nervous about talking to strangers. They’re like, “We’re gonna have to do what?” They were terrified.

    I remember the first night we were in the L.A. train station getting ready for our first overnight train to Tucson, and like, that was just the nerves of, like, “Oh my god, oh my god. What are they gonna say?”

    We read a really helpful book by Mónica Guzmán, [I Never Thought of It That Way] [that] talked about how to talk [and] why you want to talk across difference. It’s a cute book. It’s really accessible. There are some drawings in it and the students really connected with that.

    Once they got over [the fear], it was really easy, but in a way, they almost needed the invitation to talk to strangers from me. I can tell you about some of the conversations, but that was the biggest fear.

    One thing I’ll say is I knew that the strangers would enrich their lives, but I did not anticipate how much [the students] would enrich the other people on the train. I saw them lighting up other people. We’re nervous about how other people are gonna see us, but we also don’t realize the gift we are to other people.

    Q: That’s really cool. I was also curious about the students. You took nine students in the spring of 2024. Were they from San Diego? Were they from everywhere? Was this a trip that was exposing them to new and different parts of the U.S.?

    A: Great question, because I really was wondering that, too.

    Some of the students had really traveled, but they hadn’t traveled in the U.S., in the same way, or they’d driven across maybe quickly. We had a few U.S. citizens, a Canadian, [all] different ages, like 22 to … we had some older folks.

    It was a really nice mix, but again, people haven’t really seen our country in that way, or we’re just trying to get from point A to point B, we’re just trying to see what this country looks like. So I think for almost all of us [it was new]. I actually hadn’t been to half the stops.

    Q: How was that for you, navigating those spaces for the first time alongside your students?

    A: It was a good lesson. They were so great, so they rolled with it. But I was like, it would have been really helpful to know … I mean, they’re so competent, and we all figured things out, but I think it would have been [better] if I’d known the space better. Next time I’ll be able to get different speakers [to speak with students], knowing where we have more time, knowing distances.

    But actually, I think in a way, it made me fresh, too, and it kept me open. Like, “OK, I’m the leader, in a sense, but we’re co-learning and co-creating this experience.”

    Q: One of my favorite parts of student experiential learning is that reflection piece—getting students to sit down, maybe write about it or talk through those experiences. What was that reflection piece like?

    A: I gave everyone a journal with a sticker for our class, and everyone had writing assignments. One student made this beautiful scrapbook; they took napkins from places and [wrote] all over.

    Every morning on WhatsApp, I’d write the writing prompt of the day that would have them reflect upon where we’d been. Did they anticipate a place to be a particular way and then it wasn’t?

    The most surprising outcome of the writing exercise for me was I asked them at the end to rate which cities they would want to live in, and for many students, Birmingham, Ala., ended up in the top two.

    Q: Wow. Why was that?

    A: I know, and you wouldn’t think that from students who are studying in San Diego on the coast. You’d think they’d want to be on the coast, maybe. But they thought [Birmingham] was super livable. They’d made all these great parks. It was affordable, it was relaxed, it had great arts, it had a university. And so they’re like, “I can live here.” And I know one of the stresses for younger people is like, “How can I afford to live in a place?” And they saw it, and they’re like, “I could live and thrive here.” And that helped me understand what was on their minds.

    Q: We talk a lot about flyover states in travel, like, these are just places that you pass through. But I think having that intentionality to show students, Birmingham, Ala., actually has really cool things, and you’d never know unless you got off the train or got out of the car and looked at it. I hope it sparked a bit of adventure in these students, at least, to maybe explore areas that they wouldn’t typically.

    A: I hope so, too, and really that they now are anchored in what they saw in these places, and so when they hear about them in the news, or this and that, they have their own experience as well, to anchor any other stories they’re hearing.

    Q: I love that you mentioned media, or how we consume stories about places that are unfamiliar, because that was one of the goals [of the course]: to create empathy with people who might be different, demographically or in their living situation or their political views.

    I know that was a big driver in this, creating conversations in a challenging time for our country. I wonder if you can talk about that growth, or that experience that you saw students having to step out of their own comfort zones and learn and empathize with others.

    A: I think we wanted to get [experiences] and we will, next time, get even more experiences.

    I took them to the 16th Street Baptist Church, which is the famous church where a bomb exploded during the civil rights movement and four little girls were killed. And then I was like, “Well, I think it’s Sunday, so we might as well go to church,” and some were like, “Oh my god, we’re not gonna do that,” like, terrified, “Oh my god.” This is a famous church. Let’s just, like, see what they have to offer, and see what they’re talking about.

    We were so lucky. There was a really young pastor. He was like, 22, and we were sitting there in terror. And then it was like, “Oh, that was actually kind of interesting.” But that was a real out-of-your-comfort-zone [moment].

    For example, there’s a lot of collective, understandable concern about climate change and the fossil fuel industry, and when you meet the people who are in the industry, they’re not evil people. Most of the people who work in it or work in offshoots of it, it’s where they grew up. This is what’s there. These are the jobs. And so you start to realize, “Oh, right, these are people who have a job or are raising a family,” and it helps to stop the deep othering. You can still be tough on the problem, but that idea of being soft on the people.

    We had a guy [in the class] who was a marine. He’s a big guy, so he had the courage to go up to this other really big guy on the train. He was filled with tattoos and stuff, and they had a great conversation. The [stranger] apparently, trained with Mike Tyson or something. But he was like, “I was even nervous around this guy.”

    We were really demographically different as a group. Like, we had gender differences, ethnic differences, so you got to see and be like, “Now, when you move through that space, what did you notice? What did you notice?” And that was fun, too. It wasn’t designed that way. It was just who signed up for the class, but that was fun to see. We made some surprising friends along the way.

    Q: Do you have a favorite anecdote or interaction that you or a student had?

    A: One of the nice things about the overnight train is that you have to eat meals with different people, with strangers. We met this couple, a doctor and her husband, and we got really chatty with them. One of the students said she spent the evening talking to this woman and just like, cried out, like all the things she’s worried about in the world. And she said, “This woman consoled me.” Her name is Consuelo. She’s like, “[Consuelo] helped me heal my heart in such a powerful way.”

    And we then ran into them. We met them in Tucson, we ran into them in New Orleans on the street. We had this happy reunion, because we had all talked to them and benefited from them. And there’s some things, I don’t know if you’ve ever found this, but sometimes you can share more easily with a stranger. And so there were a lot of conversations, like the marine ended up learning how to make, like, essential oils and candles. I was like, given this little crystal from somebody. Students were up knitting with people, playing card games at night with strangers.

    Of course, when there’s a lot of uncertainty, we close up, and fear makes us quiet, and then that just allows more fear, more distrust, and it’s a spiral. So we went with an intention to not do that. We wanted to enjoy each other, and we wanted to enjoy this country, and we really did. I mean, we had no problems with anybody, actually, on the whole trip. I mean, I don’t think we created any problems.

    Oh, actually, we did have one sort of contentious conversation on the way to L.A. that was pretty funny …

    Q: That’s pretty early in the trip to have it, too.

    A: Yeah, I forget what I said, but she was, like, not having it. I think she was really against electric vehicles or something. I just didn’t expect it. So I was like, “Oh yeah, OK, yeah, no, it’s true. The batteries are a problem. I’m with you.”

    Q: If you had to give advice or insight to somebody else who wants to do something similar, maybe not that long of a trip or that far across the country, but what really made the experience work? Is there anything you would do differently?

    A: Great question, especially as I’m looking to plan one for next May. It definitely doesn’t have to be long, like, even a short trip—I mean, the longer trips, you have people who are touring and so they’re, like, more open—but I would have students sit next to different people and I would have the group be small enough that the students talk to different people.

    I don’t know if listeners have heard of Bryan Stevenson, who wrote Just Mercy and created the Legacy of Slavery museum, but I just heard him give a talk in San Diego a couple weeks ago, and he was talking about the importance of being in proximity to the people who are having the experiences. The closer you can get students—we went to Homeboy Industries, which is the largest gang rehabilitation center in the world. It’s in L.A., and they got to talk to some of the people who were in that program, and the stories, like … I could never recreate that.

    It’s doing that piece, getting them in proximity and creating opportunities for them to have one-on-one little conversations with them, like, “Hey, I had this question,” so I think that’s important.

    I’m taking a bunch of students into prison in a couple weeks to also get in proximity to the people we don’t hear from. So I’d say a smaller group, be in proximity.

    You can also have, like, for Homeboys, we [spoke with] somebody who was in recovery, but we also had a criminologist with us, so she could talk about the systems and he could talk about the lived experience. So it’s nice to have both.

    Q: I think there can be a narrative that people writ large, but especially young people, do not want to engage with people that are different from them. And I wonder, just based on your experience with this trip, and then also some of this other work that you’re doing taking students into prisons, how we can combat that narrative and reaffirm that it is important to speak across differences, and that people are eager to learn how to do that?

    A: I’m with you. I understand. I don’t love to dive right into difference. But I think the starting point is that we actually have a lot more in common than is different. Like, we focus on the difference, and that creates a lot of pain and separation.

    I mean, I bet we’re all even close with people with whom we really disagree on certain things, but it just doesn’t come up, like we just talk about, you know, the Venn diagram, where we overlap, right? But there’s parts of us that don’t quite fit.

    So you can always find connection really easily. You talk about the weather, you can complain about a train being late, or even something silly, and then just bond over that, and then just let it roll.

    I think going headlong into difference is a hard place to start when there’s no trust in the relationship, and even when there is, you kind of want to edge your way around it. But I think we all need to learn it; I need to learn it, too. I’m better at it in some contexts than others, like when I’m surprised, like that woman [who opposed electric vehicles], I was like, “Wait, OK, hold on, I didn’t know I was gonna run into difference right here.” But it’s a practice, so I don’t know, maybe I teach what I most need to learn. So I’m learning it with the students. It’s a great process, and it’s just so great to be open about it.

    But I think what we end up finding is that we have a lot more in common. Like, when you get under the top issues and, like, what do people care about? They want to feel safe. They want their families to be healthy. They want to be healthy. They want to feel prosperous. They want to enjoy what they’re doing. They want their kids to thrive. They want clean air—like, ultimately, under it all, are we really that different? I don’t know.

    Q: That’s great. Higher education is doing its best to be more constructive when it comes to dialogue and embracing students with differences and teaching how to have productive conversations on campus. Because we’ve seen—I think, especially in the past year and a half—how escalations can happen on campus. So I like that this is a microcosm of, “Here’s how you take this [skill] out into the real world. Here’s how you practice. Here’s how you do it in a safe way with friends, and then go forth and do.”

    A: Yeah. In class, I have students create role-plays about conflicts that they’re interested in, with lots of different perspectives. So students get to practice talking with people who have different views, but we’re all acting, and they get to try on different views. I think that’s good in the classroom, too, when you can’t get on a train right away, role-plays where students can experience difference when acting, and no one has to take responsibility for different viewpoints.

    Q: It’s Jane Doe saying those things, not me, Ashley.

    A: Exactly! “Jane said that, I dunno.”

    Got Leads?

    If you live in or have connections to places and spaces in the Southwest or Southern U.S. that hold cultural, national or personal significance that you think would be an interesting and educational stop for her class next spring, Federman said readers can email her.

    Q: What’s next? You mentioned another trip coming up in May—what are you hoping and planning for?

    A: Yeah! That’s gonna be the 250th anniversary of the country, so that’s going to be a very interesting time. We’ll still plan to do it in May. We’ll do a similar route, but I’m thinking of some different ways to do it that tie into those themes, glories and traumas of our 250-year history. I think that’s sort of the theme I’m gonna go with.

    I definitely want to do more with talking to strangers. I want to go, if they’ll let us in, to like a pancake breakfast at a church, or some kind of county fair or a rodeo. We want to get into small-town things. We’re a small group, so we won’t be overwhelming, but just to really get a sense of a place.

    Get more content like this directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.

    Source link

  • ‘What the hell just happened?’ Australia’s flirtation with a levy on international students – By Professor Andrew Norton

    ‘What the hell just happened?’ Australia’s flirtation with a levy on international students – By Professor Andrew Norton

    • This blog has been kindly written for HEPI by Andrew Norton, Professor of Higher Education Policy at Monash Business School, Monash University.
    • The thoughts of Nick Hillman, HEPI’s Director, on the levy can be read on the Research Professional News website here.

    For an Australian reader the UK immigration white paper’s proposal for a levy on international student fee revenue sounds familiar. In mid-2023 just such a levy was suggested for Australia by the interim report of a major higher education policy review. Like its UK version, the idea was to reinvest levy revenue in education. While the interim report lacked white paper status, education minister Jason Clare liked the idea enough to mention it in his report launch speech

    But now the levy has vanished from the Australian policy agenda. When the Universities Accord final report was released in February 2024 the levy idea was there but postponed, shunted off until after other major funding reforms that will start in 2027 at the earliest. So far as I can find, the Minister – newly reappointed this week after Labor’s election victory on 3 May – has not mentioned the idea in public for 18 months.

    So what happened? Predictably, the universities that stood to lose the most from the levy opposed it. But the bigger reason was that between mid-2023 and late 2023 the politics of international education in Australia were turned upside down. In a few months international education went from a valuable export industry to a cause of Australia’s housing shortages. International student numbers had to be cut. 

    As originally proposed in Australia the international student levy was not linked to migration policy. Some reduction in student demand was predicted, as levy costs were passed on through higher fees. But this was a policy side-effect, not its goal. If too many international students were deterred the levy would not raise enough money to achieve its domestic objectives. The Government needed more effective ways of bringing international student numbers back down. 

    Between October 2023 and July 2024 the Australian Government introduced, on my count, nine measures to block or discourage would-be international students. 

    Among the Government’s nine measures was one that delivered it international student revenue much more quickly than the proposed levy. The Government more than doubled student visa application fees from A$710 (~£330) to A$1,600 (~£745), claiming that the money would be spent on policies benefiting domestic students. During the 2025 election campaign Labor said it would increase visa fees again, to A$2,000 (~£930). The UK’s £524 fee looks cheap by comparison. 

    Higher visa fees and other migration measures had two big advantages over the once-proposed levy from the perspective of the Australian Government – legal ease and speed in delivering on migration goals. In Australia, many migration changes can be made by ministerial determination without parliamentary review. The levy required legislation. Australia’s system of sending controversial legislation to often-bruising Senate inquiries increases political costs, even when the bill ultimately passes.

    What visa fees lack is the Robin Hood element of the Australian levy as proposed. In 2023 the University of Sydney alone earned 14% of all university international student fee revenue. The top six universities received more than half of the total. Levy advocates argue that these gains are built on past taxpayer subsidies and prime real estate. Profits built on these foundations can legitimately be taxed for the wider benefit of Australian higher education. 

    In Australia generally, and under Labor governments especially, an egalitarian political culture gives these levy arguments some resonance. But for the foreseeable future migration is a bigger issue than university funding, and visa policies a more straightforward way of bringing down international student numbers than levies. Perhaps the levy idea will return, but the government’s long silence on the subject suggests that this will not happen anytime soon.

    Source link

  • Euro visions: In Poland in May, cities belong to students

    Euro visions: In Poland in May, cities belong to students

    Gara (problem-solving abilities), Urra (wisdom and creativity), Raga (courage and resilience), Zargo (health and success) and Czarodoro (overcoming personal limitations).

    Oh, and Jarga (the cleansing of negative energies) and Jarun (karmic balance).

    No, it’s not Poland’s graduate attributes framework – it’s a set of new age “agmas” that Polish Eurovision entrant Justyna Steczkowska starts chanting in the final 30 seconds of her song “Gaja”.

    It says here that it’s a song about primordial Earth goddess Gaia from Greek mythology, narrating a transformation from pain to empowerment while symbolizing both sorrow and the cleansing of past wounds.

    It may well be, but made up words is really just a remixed Eurovision trope – it’s Diggi-Loo Diggi-Ley or Wadde hadde dudde but in a minor key with a straighter face.

    In this year’s Wielki Finał Polskich Kwalifikacji (“The grand finale of the Polish qualifications”), I was rooting for the much more interesting Lusterka, performed by “Podlasie Bounce” act Sw@da x Niczos.

    It’s sung entirely in Podlasian – an East Slavic microlanguage that’s a mix of Belarusian and Ukrainian which at one stage caused Belarusian authorities to label the act as “extremist” over promoting cultural narratives counter to the regime’s ideology:

    If you’ve been to our concert, you know that our music is about dancing out emotions that are shared by all people, regardless of language, skin color or worldview.

    Sadly rather than travelling to Basel on May 17th, they’ll be headlining the Gdańsk Juwenalia – the biggest student festival in northern Poland, where the SUs from six universities join forces to organise two huge nights of music, along with a “talkStage” featuring engaging interviews with notable guests, a “Student Zone” where the public can learn about students’ projects and research, a massive public barbecue and an “integration of faculties and organizations zone”.

    The big student cities of Lublin, Wrocław and Kraków have their own earlier in the month – and now having seen a couple in action, they really are astonishing.

    Bawcie się dobrze!

    Every May, pretty much every university town and city in Poland has a Juwenalia. Loosely translated as “festival of youth”, it’s a cultural institution that balances celebration with resistance, tradition with innovation, and individual expression with collective identity.

    And its evolution over the years mirrors Poland’s own journey – from medieval scholarly tradition through communist oppression to contemporary democratic renewal.

    Across four zones scattered around Kraków, students will have the opportunity to hear their favorite artists live, compete in various sports competitions, and integrate with new friends through a whole range of other activities and projects.

    What makes it fascinating isn’t just its scale, or how long it’s been around, but how it both reflects society and kicks off change. When free expression was dangerous, Juwenalia gave students a space where they could voice critique through metaphor, satire, and symbolism. And when tragedy struck – like when anti-communist student activist Stanisław Pyjas was murdered in 1977 – it transformed into a powerful way for students to stand together against injustice.

    You can trace Juwenalia back to medieval Europe, where universities functioned as semi-autonomous communities with their own customs and rituals. In Poland, that first took shape in the 15th century at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków, where students would organise processional performances featuring musicians and mimes.

    Breve regnum erigitur is a song from the mid-15th century, sung by students in Kraków during their annual week of student rule, where there was a reversal of hierarchy – students elected their own “king”, took over the university and abolished lectures.

    But the modern form of Juwenalia really came together in 1964, during celebrations marking the 600th anniversary of Jagiellonian. That year, students processed from Wawel Castle to Kraków’s Main Square under the slogan: “From Casimir the Great to Casimir the Better” – a nod to both the university’s founder, King Casimir the Great, and the institution’s then-rector, Professor Kazimierz Lepszy. And it quickly spread both around the city and the country.

    What always interests me about the student traditions we see across Europe is how they mix elements from multiple traditions, and from both the past and the present. In Juwenalia you can see echoes of ancient Roman festivals like the Bacchanalia and Saturnalia, medieval carnivals with their temporary suspension of hierarchy, and academic ceremonies reflecting the special status of university communities throughout European history.

    It gives Juwenalia a really interesting cultural vocabulary – one that proved pretty adaptable during each of Poland’s complex political transformations. Hence during the communist era, when public expression was tightly controlled, the festival’s traditional elements provided a framework within which students could engage in subtle forms of resistance and critique.

    That Juwenalia survived and thrived under communism tells us a lot about its cultural significance. The regime, wary of student gatherings, recognised the political cost of suppressing a beloved tradition. Students, meanwhile, used the festivals as opportunities for creative dissent, embedding political commentary in performances, costumes, and slogans that were just ambiguous enough to escape censorship.

    Universities are always caught between tradition and change – and the tension between celebration and dissent reached its peak in 1977, when a tragedy transformed the nature of Juwenalia and kicked off a new phase in student resistance to communist rule.

    Stanisław Pyjas and the Black March

    On 7 May 1977, Kraków awoke to shocking news. Stanisław Pyjas, a 24-year-old student of Polish literature and philosophy at Jagiellonian University, had been found dead in a tenement stairwell at 7 Szewska Street in the city centre. His body lay in a pool of blood, and officials quickly declared the death an accident – claiming Pyjas had fallen while intoxicated.

    But students knew better.

    Pyjas and his friends were literature enthusiasts with countercultural leanings who had connections to the KOR (Workers’ Defence Committee). They gathered signatures defending arrested workers, and organised little protests against government repression. That activism had put Pyjas under intensive surveillance by the Służba Bezpieczeństwa (SB), the communist secret police, who had begun monitoring his movements and issuing threats.

    The official explanation for his death didn’t add up for those who knew him. One of his friends bribed a morgue worker to view the body privately – and what he saw confirmed his suspicions:

    I saw the face of a man who’d been beaten to death. Staszek’s death changed everything.

    News spread rapidly throughout Kraków’s universities. Within hours posters appeared in dormitories with an appeal – urging students to wear black, observe mourning, and convert the upcoming Juwenalia festivities into protest. The result was the “Black March” or “Czarne Juwenalia” of 15 May 1977.

    CURSED (MURDERERS) You murdered the innocent student S. Pyjas with knives. You submissive donkeys, Russian lackeys – out of Poland, back to your Russian motherland! It was the SB (Security Service) that murdered him! Cracovians, listen to “Radio Free Europe” and learn the truth! Long live the Student Solidarity Committee!

    Instead of the traditional carnival, thousands of students dressed in black flooded the streets following a memorial Mass at the Dominican church. They processed in silence through Kraków’s Old Town, many wearing black armbands and carrying small black flags.

    As bystanders watched the procession, the public spontaneously joined in. Marchers made their way to Wawel Hill, where Staszek’s friends publicly denounced the official cover-up and demanded justice. And as speakers said the word “solidarity,” someone in the crowd shouted, “Solidarity with whom?!” The reply: “Solidarity with ourselves!”

    That night, ten students founded the Student Committee of Solidarity (SKS) – the first independent student organisation in communist Eastern Europe, predating the broader Solidarity movement by three years. The regime had intended Pyjas’s death to intimidate students into silence – but instead it triggered a new phase of resistance:

    Staszek’s death was meant to scare us, but it created a different reaction – a process of overcoming fear.

    It all puts a particular spin on “by students, for students”.

    Przez studentów, dla studentów

    Today the scale of these things is astonishing – in Kraków alone, over 500 students are directly involved in organising the festival, almost all of which do so as unpaid volunteers, and tens of thousands of students and guests will take part.

    Making that happen across the city’s ten universities was not easy, but in 1997 the Porozumienie Samorządów Studenckich Uczelni Krakowskich established a structure for coordinating volunteer efforts across multiple institutions – and has gone on to be a vehicle to enable civic participation in the city.

    Each SU appoints a student Juwenalia Director responsible for partnerships and logistics, and then specialised teams handle everything from stage management and artist relations to security and waste management. The MS Patrol from Miasteczko Studenckie AGH, for instance, assists with security, logistics, and clean-up – developing skills in crowd management and emergency response that you just won’t get from an exam or a group project.

    These are real, authentic learning experiences where students manage budgets, negotiate contracts, coordinate teams, and develop sophisticated crisis management protocols. It also brings students together across different departments, years, and even universities:

    For those few days, we’re not competing – we’re all just students celebrating together. It’s like the walls between our universities come down.

    Talking to some of the organisers, there’s a strong sense that unlike many university traditions that reinforce existing social hierarchies, Juwenalia creates opportunities for participation across academic disciplines, year groups, and socioeconomic backgrounds. The temporary “student republic” established during the festival allows for experimentation with new social roles, relationships and responsibilities.

    As well as multi-stage concerts, a clutch of side projects and peripheral events populate the Juwenalia calendar and expand the opportunities for connection. In Krakow right at the start of the month, students put on a light show that transforms their dorm windows into a visual spectacle, after which there’s a quiz, a Disco Roller Rink and a Karaoke competition. Students can join the Blacksmith’s Run, a race from the main building to the 12th floor of Student Hall No. 1, or the Sports Festival at the Green Zone, which includes volleyball, handball, and strength challenges.

    A few days later the OSPK Day combines a BBQ, outdoor cinema, and mechanical bull riding, while the Juwe City Game sends teams racing through the Old Town to complete puzzles and challenges. There’s also an Outdoor Cinema, a chess tournament, the JuweCanDance competition, an Artistic Evening offering painting, crocheting, and ceramics, and the big Juwe Parade sees students from all universities march through the city in costume, all starting with a hearty polish Juwe Breakfast at one of the student venues.

    And every single event is run by student volunteers.

    The keys to the city

    At each Juwenalia, power reversal is both practical and symbolic. The central ritual – where the Mayor hands over the city’s keys to students – embodies what Mikhail Bakhtin called the “carnivalesque”, a temporary inversion of established hierarchies that simultaneously challenges and reinforces social order.

    That ritual traces its lineage to medieval traditions where the world was “turned upside down” during carnival periods, with fools crowned as kings and ordinary rules suspended. In contemporary Juwenalia, the inversion takes multiple forms – colourful processions disrupting urban space, symbolic control of city centres, and temporary transformation of university and civic leadership roles.

    During the communist period, the ritualistic inversions carried critique – the “taking of the keys” was a metaphor for broader democratic aspirations. Under democracy, the same ritual continues, but it’s now a celebration of student autonomy within an accepted constitutional order. The country – at least for the month of May – believes in its students, and gives them control.

    In most cities, a huge student parade following the key thing features students in elaborate costumes that can carry satirical or political messages. During the communist period, these often took the form of what James Scott called “hidden transcripts” – messages encoded in performance, costume, and symbolic gesture that conveyed political critique while maintaining plausible deniability:

    Cabaret humor dominated and allusiveness and metaphor were everywhere. Every gesture, slogan, and inscription referred to the political reality of the time.

    In today’s democratic Poland, the politics takes more overt forms – there’s bits of environmental activism, support for social causes, and commentary on current political debates – particularly in protest at the populist government in the last decade. The temporary claiming of urban space also turns streets and squares into sites of student expression – asserting the right of young people to help shape public debate.

    That cultural and political dimension then extends beyond the festival period through the organisational structures and networks it creates.

    The Student Committee of Solidarity that was founded during the Black March of 1977 evolved into a big political force, with many of its members later playing important roles in the broader Solidarity movement and Poland’s democratic transition.

    Even now, the organisational capacity developed through Juwenalia planning translates into other forms of student activism and civic engagement. The skills in coordination, communication, and coalition-building developed through festival organisation become valuable resources for addressing campus and community issues throughout the academic year – and in later life.

    Economic impact and commercialisation

    For those that were around during communism, it’s all a bit commercial these days. Budgets run into millions of PLN per institution – and so need multiple revenue streams, including university allocations, ticket sales, sponsorships, and partnerships with local businesses on the other side of the excel sheet.

    Wandering around this year’s festival grounds in both Kraków and Lublin, the commercial presence was unmistakable – sponsor logos on stages and barriers, branded merchandise filled the JuweSklep, and promotional activities populated the festival zones.

    But students know how to get the balance right. One of the student “External Cooperation Coordinators” I met rabbitted on about how maintaining an authentic character remained a priority:

    We’re selective about partnerships. We look for sponsors who understand and respect the cultural significance of Juwenalia, not just those with the biggest budgets.

    The economic impact extends beyond the festival itself. It creates significant value for local economies, particularly in cities where the student population forms a substantial segment. Hotels, restaurants, bars, and taxis all experience increased demand during the festival period. The influx of visitors – students from other cities, alumni returning for the celebrations, family members, and tourists attracted by the festivities – creates a huge multiplier effect that benefits the broader urban economy.

    And of course that also all provides valuable learning opportunities for student organisers, who pick up practical experience in budget management, contract negotiation, partnership development, and financial accountability.

    The technical infrastructure alone is impressive. At the UJ Żaczek zone, the main stage is a massive structure – 32 metres wide, 23 metres deep, and 12 metres high – requiring five trucks of equipment including sound systems, lighting rigs, and LED screens.

    And environmental considerations have become increasingly important in recent years – students arrange additional cleaning of streets and sidewalks around campus to maintain good relations with neighbouring communities and demonstrate environmental responsibility.

    You wonder why so many students are involved – but plenty of the Juwenalia volunteers were keen to chat about their personal and professional development. One of the logistics coordinators I met said that having studied project management theoretically, she found herself applying these concepts in real-time, managing a team of 15 volunteers coordinating everything from equipment delivery to artist transportation:

    The theoretical frameworks make sense only when I have to apply them under pressure. The case studies… they cannot replicate the feeling of solving problems when thousands of people are waiting for a concert to start.

    But benefits are never to be confused with motivation. The student who was serving me beer in the bar on her 14th hour at work (for free) (the work, not the beer) at first struggled to understand why I was asking the question. But she was clear about the answer:

    When you first come, you wonder if one day it could be you behind the walls helping it to happen. Everyone looks forward to it. It’s ours.

    The practical education thing extends across disciplines too. Marketing students gain hands-on experience developing promotional campaigns and managing social media platforms that reach thousands of followers. Engineering students apply technical knowledge to stage construction and sound system setup. Economics and management students develop budgeting and financial reporting skills managing six-figure budgets.

    And the experiences often translate directly into career opportunities. Juwenalia volunteers leverage their festival experience to get positions in event management, marketing, public relations, and arts administration. Others apply the leadership and teamwork skills in entirely different sectors, noting that employers value the practical problem-solving abilities developed through festival organisation.

    The professional networks formed during Juwenalia are also critical. Volunteers form connections not only with fellow students but also with university managers, local business leaders, government officials, and cultural professionals, and the relationships persist beyond graduation, creating mentorship opportunities and professional referrals that can rocket boost their career.

    Popping off

    But maybe most importantly, Juwenalia participation seems to help students discover and develop capabilities they didn’t know they had. Watching one of the Promotion Coordinators directing her team, it was hard to imagine that she had once described herself as “very shy”:

    I think that Juwenalia has made me develop communication skills I didn’t think I had. I am thinking about careers I would never have thought of before.

    And for students just enjoying it all, there are emotional and transformative experiences for them too:

    Singing with six thousand people, in beautiful weather, on campus at the best time of their lives – that’s the experience!

    The sentiment was palpable during top pop star and headliner Zeamsone’s set at the UJ Żaczek Zone. As thousands of voices joined in with the lyrics, for many first-year students in attendance, this was probably their first experience of true university community – a powerful flip from the often isolating experience of contemporary academic life.

    Sociologist Émile Durkheim called moments like that “collective effervescence” – a heightened sense of emotional energy and group solidarity that emerges from shared ritual experiences. These are moments that can profoundly alter participants’ sense of identity and belonging, creating lasting emotional connections to both the university community and the broader cultural traditions it embodies.

    What a shame that the only ones left I can think of in UK HE are graduation ceremonies – held once it’s all over.

    Civic dimensions

    I should talk about the civic stuff. Juwenalia has what one of the organisers I met called a “complicated” relationship with their host cities – it transforms urban spaces, disrupts normal patterns of city life, and can annoy plenty of the locals.

    But the symbolic “taking of the keys” is partly about recognising legitimate stakeholders in urban governance. Mayors turn up, do the speech and get the press coverage partly because they were probably in the parade in their youth – and partly because they need the votes.

    In Kraków, festival organisers begin meeting with police, city guards, and fire services months in advance, developing detailed security and logistics plans. The parade, which processes through central Kraków to Plac Szczepański, requires particular attention to traffic management, crowd control, and public safety. They are interactions that create excellent opportunities for students to engage with civic institutions and processes – building their “linking” social capital in the process.

    From the city’s perspective, Juwenalia offers big benefits. These are events that showcase the area’s educational institutions, attract thousands of visitors, generate significant economic activity, and contribute to a city’s urban culture.

    They also act as recruitment and access tools for prospective students, offering up a glimpse of contemporary student culture and creating opportunities for intergenerational interaction. Almost everyone I met that was organising Juwenalia had sneaked into one before they were a student – or at least dreamed of doing so.

    They also promote higher education more broadly. On display is student creativity, leadership, and community spirit – smashing negative stereotypes about student life and showcasing the diverse talents developed within university communities.

    I tried very hard to find negative or nasty local press coverage about Juwenalia. I couldn’t find any.

    The soul of student culture

    If I think about “May Ball” culture in the UK, I just become miserable. Like so much of what’s rotten about higher education in the UK, our version of student spring celebrations all roots back to Aldi versions of Oxbridge – lavish all-night parties, black-tie dress, fine dining, fireworks, open bars, boorish boys burning £20 notes in front of the homeless, and allegations of sexual misconduct to be handled in the weeks afterwards.

    Juwenalia couldn’t be less exclusive, involves the public, is usually cheap (and often free), is deliberately diverse and is about subverting power hierarchies, not reinforcing them.

    With some notable exceptions, outside of the upper echelons, big tentpole student events with big tents and big budgets generating big problems are all but gone now. Maybe the cost of alcohol did it, or health and safety, or student diversity, or the professionalisation of SUs, or the collapse of our domestic music industry, or cost of living – maybe all of those. Maybe they’re really still there – just smaller and hidden. But what I’m sure of is the lack of what Juwenalia is really there to do – to maintain, promote and develop what we might call student culture.

    As things started to get really difficult for students post-pandemic, I think the assumption was that once the scarring of isolation was gone, things would bounce back. In some ways they have, in some ways not – but what’s still missing is what has been missing for a long time.

    Back in Krakow, the Jagiellonian University Students and Graduates Foundation emerged from Poland’s transformative post-1989 democratic and economic changes, and revived a cherished 19th-century tradition of student mutual aid societies – it dedicates itself to improving the social and living conditions of the university’s academic community while championing cultural, scientific, and artistic initiatives.

    It’s funded via the revenue generated from activities like the halls of residence that it owns, and donations – and offers scholarships, facilitates employment opportunities, and supports students facing financial hardship. It also co-finances academic projects, cultural events, and sports activities, publishes student magazines, and runs international exchange programmes.

    And its governance reflects a collaborative balance between the university and its students – on its Board are both academic staff and students elected by the council of the SU. Crucially, at arm’s length from the university itself and a little separate from the representative role of the SU, it takes on much of what we might in the UK describe as professional “student services” – largely via the facilitation of volunteer-led project work.

    Just up the road, the biggest student foundation in the city is called ACADEMICA, established in 2000 and spearheaded as a partnership between the SU’s council and the vice-rector to support student activities, initially managing four student clubs and the university canteen. It now operates cultural initiatives, various student study halls and facilities, Poland’s biggest student nightclub, and a mini-brewery and a bistro – and both employs over 500 students directly and facilities about 3000 in volunteer roles.

    Its “host” SU at the AGH University of Science and Technology is like many of the others we saw in Poland in January – it runs a huge Board Games night runs weekly, there’s an adaptation camp and rights talk for new students, and an AI Days conference created by a team of students with sessions on the importance of basic AI knowledge for future graduates.

    Goddamn we’re greatness

    Doing things for others, rather than helping them do things for themselves, is deep inside the UK’s culture of charity. It takes on a momentum – it creates sector conformity, sets up recognised careers, generates LinkedIn posts, demands spend on strategic away days, and has a language and culture concerned with measurement, metrics and justification. It also creates an expectation – that other people will do things for students – and that their job is merely to moan when the providers inevitably over-promise and under-deliver.

    There are lots of things that are great about that culture too – but I’ve been surprised about the post-pandemic acceleration of a process in which both universities and their SUs have so readily jumped on the bandwagon of assumption that students will never do anything for themselves ever again. They’ve got no time, they’ve got no money, they’ve got no social skills, so we’ll have to do it all for them, and we’ll feel good about it when we put on that game of rounders or that crochet class.

    Letting go – being deliberate about creating the structures, scaffolding and cultures where students can do things for themselves – is tough. Professionals are proud. But the idea that in a mass system you can build social capital by injecting transferable skills into what contact hours are left, or that you can build confidence by having the odd student staff member around to help with the admin, is all relative obvious nonsense.

    Being ambitious about student creativity and control can’t just be about what they do academically. And having a vision for student culture – one that is social, enabling, contributory, and stretches them to find the time and resources to inherit and shape it – will at least make them angrier about the fact that some of their friends don’t have the time or money to take part.

    As Magdalena Herman, President at Jagiellonian’s SU put it:

    And I have to tell you that when I look at all these people, and I’m like, whoa, we did this all by ourselves? And we are only 24 years old, you know? And we’re like, how? God, damn, we’re great.

    Source link

  • What Can College Instructors Offer Their Students in the Age of AI? – Faculty Focus

    What Can College Instructors Offer Their Students in the Age of AI? – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Asking students about value | Wonkhe

    Asking students about value | Wonkhe

    To value something (or not) is a curious thing.

    You can value anything; someone’s opinion, their feelings, their house, indeed nothing is out of the scope of being valued.

    In its broadest philosophical sense, value can be considered as the importance of any object, feeling or an action, prescribed by an individual before, during or after the fact.

    If we consult the ancient texts, then Plato offers a binary view of value. There is instrumental value, where something serves as a means to another end, and then there’s intrinsic value, which is just that.

    Its value exists by virtue of its own existence, it does not need to enable any other end or objective.

    The value of higher education

    So, is a degree and any student loan repayments just a means to graduate employment and taxpayer ROI (instrumental value), or is being within university education in of itself valuable (intrinsic)?

    I’m going to dodge the question early doors, to be honest, and instead invite discussion alongside a presentation of the student view of all of this. I’m nearing the end of a three-year longitudinal data collection process, whereby I’ve been annually surveying and interviewing the same cohort of undergraduate students from five different HEIs since the end of their first year back in May 2023. This has largely been in service of my part-time PhD, but with a day job in student experience and enhancement there’s some ready employment applicability.

    How did we get here?

    Please do check out my PhD literature review when it’s published for a fulsome answer, but in summary, a series of neoliberal policy interventions since the 1963 Robbins Report have led us to where we are today. The commodification of HE has crept in over time, and instruments like the NSS launched in 2005 (happy 20th anniversary!) and a new market regulator in 2017 are not insignificant markers of this creep.

    “Value for money” as a phrase, for the full villain origin story, appeared in the 1980s via the Local Government and Finance act, defining value for money in terms of 3Es: economy, efficiency and effectiveness. With the creation of the aforementioned HE regulator in 2017, value for money became part of regular policy parlance, given it was a central feature of the OfS’ strategy documentation and purpose. It also inspired people like myself and others to get under the skin of what it actually means in this context.

    Right here, right now

    By annually surveying and interviewing the same cohort of students across five institutions throughout their university education so far, I’ve found a few threads to pull on that I want to share. The first one is all about time and the temporal location of student value for money perceptions.

    Current policy is at odds with how students think about the value of their education. It looks into a hazy future of graduate earnings and loan repayments, with the higher of each being the better for all concerned. From my research, and the addition of a ‘temporal location’ to all my survey interview responses, student perceptions of value for money are located in the present day or recent past. They are not looking to a near-future and PAYE potential; they are looking at what they currently get versus the expectations they had and that is the challenge for institutions to overcome.

    Non-users and peer influencers

    A second research thread to dangle for readers here is that of non-user bias in student value for money perceptions. From my data, students are more likely to rate a particular aspect of their student experience as negative value for money when they haven’t used it. They don’t opt for neutral ratings; they go for negative as “I don’t know what they do.”

    As a counterpoint from my data, those students who do engage are far more likely to rate aspects as good value for money and on the whole are receiving excellent customer service (their words, not mine!). These two things in tandem really are a challenge for institutions, as while engagement leads to positive perceptions, very few will have the resource capacity to cater for all of their students.

    The influence of near-peers also can’t be understated. Students in my research will think something is bad value for money if a peer tells them so. This isn’t perhaps a shocking revelation, but what it can create is a barrier to that student ever engaging with that service for themselves, as it didn’t work out for their friend (as is their perception).

    How do you deliver timely (and personalised) messages to students in order to make them aware of the variety of things on offer for them? In an NSS context this is vital because students who think over the course of their degree that something hasn’t happened or not been available may well score you as such.

    Value for money when money is tight

    In my research I ask students about their value for money perceptions of student services and support. For positive perceptions one thing is very apparent in that they are largely driven by a direct engagement with any particular service, and doubly that their expectations of that service were met. They got what they thought they came in for.

    If you want students to think you offer value for money, then any investment you have in student support ought to focus on providing an excellent service, and meeting student expectations of that. This sounds simple, and indeed rather basic, but a bad experience leads to that student telling their peers, who may then not engage when they themselves need to access that particular service. In the current era we can’t give every student everything, and nostalgia for a more affluent time won’t help. All you can do is excel at the services you do offer to students and feed that positivity cycle.

    Dark and dangerous times lie ahead

    The sector is in a tricky financial situation, resources are shrinking, international numbers are in flux and your current and next incoming cohort are going to feed your APP, NSS, and TEF metrics for the remainder of this decade. Looking through a value for money lens, the things that drive positive student perceptions are excellent service levels that align to what they were expecting to happen. Focus on doing that very well is what you have to do when expansion and new projects aren’t an option.

    As one last bit of insight from my research, I ask students each year if they feel like they know what their tuition fee is spent on, and the majority say no. I also ask them to rate their overall university experience for value for money, and 44 per cent give it a very good or good rating. That 44 per cent is slightly above what you see in the annual HEPI Student Academic Experience Survey, but for those in my data who do feel like they know where their tuition is spent, this rises significantly to 73 per cent. You don’t need an itemised Council Tax type bill, but something not far off that demonstrates the breadth of fee spend could work wonders.

    Source link

  • Trump’s Deportation Database Puts Students at Risk – The 74

    Trump’s Deportation Database Puts Students at Risk – The 74

    School (in)Security is our biweekly briefing on the latest school safety news, vetted by Mark KeierleberSubscribe here.

    Tennessee state Sen. Bo Watson wants to eject undocumented students from public school classrooms. But first, he needs their data

    Watson seeks to require students statewide to submit a birth certificate or other sensitive documents to secure their seats — one of numerous efforts nationwide this year as Republican state lawmakers seek to challenge a decades-old Supreme Court precedent enshrining students’ right to a free public education regardless of their immigration status.

    Some 300 demonstrators participate in a Waukegan, Illinois, rally on Feb. 1 to draw attention to an increase in Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity in the area. Privacy advocates warn student records could be used to assist deportations. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

    In my latest feature this week, I dive into why those efforts have alarmed student data privacy advocates, who warn that efforts to compile data on immigrant students could be used not just to deny them an education  — it could also fall into the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    As the Trump administration ramps up deportations and tech billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency reportedly works to create a “master database” of government records to zero in on migrants, data privacy experts warn that state and federal data about immigrant students could be weaponized. 


    In the news

    Cybercriminals demanded ransom payments from school districts nationwide this week, using millions of K-12 students’ sensitive data as leverage after the files were stolen from education technology giant PowerSchool in a massive cyberattack late last year. The development undercuts PowerSchool’s decision to pay a ransom in December to keep the sensitive documents under wraps. | The 74

    Gutted: Investigations at the Education Department’s civil rights office have trickled to a halt as the Trump administration installs a “shadow division” to advance cases that align with the president’s agenda. | ProPublica

    • Civil rights groups, students and parents have asked courts to block the Education Department’s civil rights enforcement changes under Trump, saying they fail to hold schools accountable for racial harassment and abuses against children with disabilities. | K-12 Dive
    • Among the thousands of cases put on the back burner is a complaint from a Texas teenager who was kneed in the face by a campus cop. | The 74

    ‘The hardest case for mercy’: Congratulations to Marshall Project contributor Joe Sexton, who was named a Pulitzer Prize finalist for his reporting on a legal team’s successful bid to spare the Parkland, Florida, school shooter from the death penalty. | The Marshall Project

    The city council in Uvalde, Texas, approved a $2 million settlement with the families of the victims in the 2022 shooting at Robb Elementary School, the first lawsuit to end with monetary payouts since 19 children and two teachers were killed. | Insurance Journal 

    • In Michigan, a state commission created in the wake of the 2021 school shooting at Oxford High School, which resulted in the deaths of four students, issued a final report calling for additional funding to strengthen school mental health supports. | Chalkbeat
    • Meanwhile, at the federal level, the Education Department axed $1 billion in federal grants designed to train mental health professionals and place them in schools in a bid to thwart mass shootings. | The 74

    A high school substitute teacher in Ohio was arrested on accusations she offered a student $2,000 to murder her husband. | WRIC

    Connecticut schools have been forced to evacuate from fires caused by a “dangerous TikTok trend” where students stab school-issued laptops with paper clips to cause electrical short circuits. | WFSB

    Eleven high school lacrosse players in upstate New York face unlawful imprisonment charges on accusations they staged a kidnapping of younger teammates who thought they were being abducted by armed assailants. | CNN

    Sign-up for the School (in)Security newsletter.

    Get the most critical news and information about students’ rights, safety and well-being delivered straight to your inbox.

    The Future of Privacy Forum has “retired” its Student Privacy Pledge after a decade. The pledge, which was designed to ensure education technology companies were ethical stewards of students’ sensitive data, was ended due to “the changing technological and policy landscape regarding education technology.” | Future of Privacy Forum

    • The pledge had previously faced scrutiny over its ability to hold tech vendors accountable for violating its terms. | The 74
    • New kid on the block: Almost simultaneously, Common Sense Privacy launched a “privacy seal certification” to recognize vendors that are “deeply committed to privacy.” | Business Wire

    Google plans to roll out an artificial intelligence chatbot for children as the tech giant seeks to attract young eyeballs to its AI products. | The New York Times

    Kansas schools plan to spend state money on AI tools to spot guns despite concerns over reports of false alarms. | Beacon Media


    ICYMI @The74

    A new report from the Department of Health and Human Services suggests gender-affirming health care puts transgender youth at risk but the report ignores years of research indicating otherwise. (Getty Images)

    HHS Condemns Gender-Affirming Care in Report That Finds ‘Sparse’ Evidence of Harm

    Chicago Public Schools’ Black Student Success Plan Under Investigation Over DEI

    SCOTUS to Rule in Case That Could Upend Enforcement of Disabled Students’ Rights


    Emotional Support

    Birds are chirping. Flowers are blooming. And 74 editor Bev Weintraub’s feline Marz is ready to pounce.


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

    Source link

  • Helping students evaluate AI-generated content

    Helping students evaluate AI-generated content

    Key points:

    Finding accurate information has long been a cornerstone skill of librarianship and classroom research instruction. When cleaning up some materials on a backup drive, I came across an article I wrote for the September/October 1997 issue of Book Report, a journal directed to secondary school librarians. A generation ago, “asking the librarian” was a typical and often necessary part of a student’s research process. The digital tide has swept in new tools, habits, and expectations. Today’s students rarely line up at the reference desk. Instead, they consult their phones, generative AI bots, and smart search engines that promise answers in seconds. However, educators still need to teach students the ability to be critical consumers of information, whether produced by humans or generated by AI tools.

    Teachers haven’t stopped assigning projects on wolves, genetic engineering, drug abuse, or the Harlem Renaissance, but the way students approach those assignments has changed dramatically. They no longer just “surf the web.” Now, they engage with systems that summarize, synthesize, and even generate research responses in real time.

    In 1997, a keyword search might yield a quirky mix of werewolves, punk bands, and obscure town names alongside academic content. Today, a student may receive a paragraph-long summary, complete with citations, created by a generative AI tool trained on billions of documents. To an eighth grader, if the answer looks polished and is labeled “AI-generated,” it must be true. Students must be taught how AI can hallucinate or simply be wrong at times.

    This presents new challenges, and opportunities, for K-12 educators and librarians in helping students evaluate the validity, purpose, and ethics of the information they encounter. The stakes are higher. The tools are smarter. The educator’s role is more important than ever.

    Teaching the new core four

    To help students become critical consumers of information, educators must still emphasize four essential evaluative criteria, but these must now be framed in the context of AI-generated content and advanced search systems.

    1. The purpose of the information (and the algorithm behind it)

    Students must learn to question not just why a source was created, but why it was shown to them. Is the site, snippet, or AI summary trying to inform, sell, persuade, or entertain? Was it prioritized by an algorithm tuned for clicks or accuracy?

    A modern extension of this conversation includes:

    • Was the response written or summarized by a generative AI tool?
    • Was the site boosted due to paid promotion or engagement metrics?
    • Does the tool used (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, or Google’s Gemini) cite sources, and can those be verified?

    Understanding both the purpose of the content and the function of the tool retrieving it is now a dual responsibility.

    2. The credibility of the author (and the credibility of the model)

    Students still need to ask: Who created this content? Are they an expert? Do they cite reliable sources? They must also ask:

    • Is this original content or AI-generated text?
    • If it’s from an AI, what sources was it trained on?
    • What biases may be embedded in the model itself?

    Today’s research often begins with a chatbot that cannot cite its sources or verify the truth of its outputs. That makes teaching students to trace information to original sources even more essential.

    3. The currency of the information (and its training data)

    Students still need to check when something was written or last updated. However, in the AI era, students must understand the cutoff dates of training datasets and whether search tools are connected to real-time information. For example:

    • ChatGPT’s free version (as of early 2025) may only contain information up to mid-2023.
    • A deep search tool might include academic preprints from 2024, but not peer-reviewed journal articles published yesterday.
    • Most tools do not include digitized historical data that is still in manuscript form. It is available in a digital format, but potentially not yet fully useful data.

    This time gap matters, especially for fast-changing topics like public health, technology, or current events.

    4. The wording and framing of results

    The title of a website or academic article still matters, but now we must attend to the framing of AI summaries and search result snippets. Are search terms being refined, biased, or manipulated by algorithms to match popular phrasing? Is an AI paraphrasing a source in a way that distorts its meaning? Students must be taught to:

    • Compare summaries to full texts
    • Use advanced search features to control for relevance
    • Recognize tone, bias, and framing in both AI-generated and human-authored materials

    Beyond the internet: Print, databases, and librarians still matter

    It is more tempting than ever to rely solely on the internet, or now, on an AI chatbot, for answers. Just as in 1997, the best sources are not always the fastest or easiest to use.

    Finding the capital of India on ChatGPT may feel efficient, but cross-checking it in an almanac or reliable encyclopedia reinforces source triangulation. Similarly, viewing a photo of the first atomic bomb on a curated database like the National Archives provides more reliable context than pulling it from a random search result. With deepfake photographs proliferating the internet, using a reputable image data base is essential, and students must be taught how and where to find such resources.

    Additionally, teachers can encourage students to seek balance by using:

    • Print sources
    • Subscription-based academic databases
    • Digital repositories curated by librarians
    • Expert-verified AI research assistants like Elicit or Consensus

    One effective strategy is the continued use of research pathfinders that list sources across multiple formats: books, journals, curated websites, and trusted AI tools. Encouraging assignments that require diverse sources and source types helps to build research resilience.

    Internet-only assignments: Still a trap

    Then as now, it’s unwise to require students to use only specific sources, or only generative AI, for research. A well-rounded approach promotes information gathering from all potentially useful and reliable sources, as well as information fluency.

    Students must be taught to move beyond the first AI response or web result, so they build the essential skills in:

    • Deep reading
    • Source evaluation
    • Contextual comparison
    • Critical synthesis

    Teachers should avoid giving assignments that limit students to a single source type, especially AI. Instead, they should prompt students to explain why they selected a particular source, how they verified its claims, and what alternative viewpoints they encountered.

    Ethical AI use and academic integrity

    Generative AI tools introduce powerful possibilities including significant reductions, as well as a new frontier of plagiarism and uncritical thinking. If a student submits a summary produced by ChatGPT without review or citation, have they truly learned anything? Do they even understand the content?

    To combat this, schools must:

    • Update academic integrity policies to address the use of generative AI including clear direction to students as to when and when not to use such tools.
    • Teach citation standards for AI-generated content
    • Encourage original analysis and synthesis, not just copying and pasting answers

    A responsible prompt might be: “Use a generative AI tool to locate sources, but summarize their arguments in your own words, and cite them directly.”

    In closing: The librarian’s role is more critical than ever

    Today’s information landscape is more complex and powerful than ever, but more prone to automation errors, biases, and superficiality. Students need more than access; they need guidance. That is where the school librarian, media specialist, and digitally literate teacher must collaborate to ensure students are fully prepared for our data-rich world.

    While the tools have evolved, from card catalogs to Google searches to AI copilots, the fundamental need remains to teach students to ask good questions, evaluate what they find, and think deeply about what they believe. Some things haven’t changed–just like in 1997, the best advice to conclude a lesson on research remains, “And if you need help, ask a librarian.”

    Steven M. Baule, Ed.D., Ph.D.
    Latest posts by Steven M. Baule, Ed.D., Ph.D. (see all)

    Source link

  • College students — and those not enrolled — see the value in higher education

    College students — and those not enrolled — see the value in higher education

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Nearly all surveyed college students, 95%, viewed at least one type of degree or higher education credential as very or extremely valuable, according to research released Wednesday by Gallup and the Lumina Foundation. Among former students who had stopped out, 93% said the same.
    • The survey also found that students believed their future degrees would provide a good return on investment. Nearly nine out of 10 students, 86%, said they were confident or very confident that their degree or credential would help them make enough money to live comfortably.
    • These findings, released amid growing concerns about higher education’s ROI, suggest U.S. adults still see value in college and believe it will help them enter their desired careers.

    Dive Insight:

    Focus on the ROI of higher education has spiked along with concerns about college costs and student debt levels. Other recent surveys report student concerns about entering into a competitive job market and artificial intelligence diminishing the value of their degrees.

    However, Gallup and Lumina’s annual State of Higher Education report suggests students still have confidence in college. The report is one of the sector’s largest nationally representative surveys and offers a deep look into how U.S. adults without a higher ed credential view the sector.

    In October, researchers surveyed almost 14,000 people between the ages of 18 and 59 who had graduated from high school but had not earned a college degree. Of them, 6,000 students were enrolled in a postsecondary program, just under 5,000 had stopped out before earning an associate or bachelor’s degree, and about 3,000 had never enrolled in college.

    Across all three groups, 72% of respondents said a two- or four-year degree is just as important — or even more so — to career success today than it was two decades ago.

    “That so many adults without a degree or credential continue to value some form of education after high school likely relates to the influence they believe higher education, and particularly degrees, can have on career outcomes,” the report said.

    Among students pursuing bachelor’s degrees, 91% reported feeling confident or very confident their diplomas would teach them the skills needed to get their desired job. A strong majority of students in associate and certificate shared that confidence — 89% and 86%, respectively.

    The survey’s results also could bode well for colleges seeking to enroll nontraditional students. 

    Following 2025, the number of high school graduates is expected to begin dropping, according to the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. This long-anticipated decline, dubbed the demographic cliff, has forced many colleges to reevaluate their enrollment pipeline and think beyond recruiting traditional-aged students.

    A third of respondents who have not attended college previously, 34%, said they were likely or very likely to pursue higher education in the next five years. That share was 57% among former students who had stopped out.

    The report also found that fewer students were weighing leaving college, either temporarily or permanently, before completing their program than in previous years.

    The share of students who considered stopping out has dropped from 41% in 2022 to 32% in 2024. But their potential reasons for leaving have remained largely unchanged, with students most frequently citing mental health and stress over the past few years.

    Among students who considered stopping out in recent months, 49% said it was due to emotional stress and 41% cited personal mental health reasons. Almost a quarter, 24%, pointed to the cost of college and a sense of not belonging.

    Source link

  • Students Without a Degree Value Higher Ed

    Students Without a Degree Value Higher Ed

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | FG Trade/E+/Getty Images

    American adults who don’t currently have a college degree see value in pursuing higher education, but the cost of a credential, mental health challenges, emotional stress or the flexibility of classes can prevent some from enrolling in and completing a program, according to the results of a survey released today.

    The Lumina Foundation and Gallup surveyed nearly 14,000 adults in October to learn more about their views toward higher education and the barriers they face in attaining a credential. This latest report is part of the State of Higher Education study, which began in 2020.

    Those surveyed include 6,000 adults who are currently enrolled at a college or university, nearly 5,000 people who have some college but no degree, and 3,000 adults who have never enrolled in a college program.

    Fifty-seven percent of those surveyed in 2024 said they considered pursuing at least one degree or credential in the past two years. That’s down two percentage points from the 2023 survey, but significantly up from 44 percent of those surveyed in 2021.

    Most respondents said some form of postsecondary credential was valuable, though bachelor’s degrees, industry certifications and graduate degrees ranked the highest. Among those who aren’t enrolled in college, 24 percent said they’re interested in pursuing an associate degree, while 18 percent have considered a bachelor’s degree. About 22 percent are interested in a certificate program, down slightly from 23 percent in last year’s report.

    Over all, 48 percent of those not currently in college said they are either very likely or likely to enroll in a postsecondary program, though those who stopped out are more likely to re-enroll compared to those who never started in the first place. Additionally, white adults are the least likely to consider some form of higher education in the next five years.

    For those currently enrolled or who stopped out, expected future job opportunities and confidence in the value of the degree or credential were key motivators in their decision to pursue higher education, though those were not the only factors.

    “The consistent link between perceived value and career outcomes underscores the importance of affordability, flexibility and student support—especially for those balancing work, caregiving or mental health struggles,” the report concludes. “To sustain this momentum and close remaining gaps, higher education institutions and policymakers will need to focus on removing barriers and reinforcing the connection between credentials and meaningful, well-paying jobs.”

    Zach Hrynowski, a senior researcher at Gallup, said the survey results show that while adults in the United States are less confident in institutions of higher education, a majority still see “the actual product that they receive from it” as beneficial, and that perceived value drives students to overcome barriers such as cost and flexibility for students who are in rural areas or are caretakers.

    “If people think it’s valuable, they’re going to still go after it. They may hem and haw, say, ‘Is this really worth it? Do I have the money? Why can’t I surmount the barriers?’” he said. “But we haven’t seen a widespread exodus away from higher education as a result of that, and that’s a testimony to the belief and the value of the credential itself.”

    But Hrynowski cautioned that if there was another way for adults to get a good job and socioeconomic improvement, prospective students might choose that option over pursuing a higher education.

    “If there was a paradigm shift and suddenly bachelor’s degrees were not the only pathway, and more and more industries had, for example, an industry certification that could be used in place of a bachelor’s degree, I’m not sure how many people would continue to chase that very expensive degree awarded by the institutions that they don’t trust very much,” he said.

    “I think right now, for a lot of people, pursuing bachelor’s degrees—especially if they’re doing it because it’s the only option—they acknowledge that if they want the benefit, then that’s the price they have to pay.”

    Source link

  • Pell Grant Dollars Are Left Unclaimed: What That Means for Students and States

    Pell Grant Dollars Are Left Unclaimed: What That Means for Students and States

    Title: Pell Dollars Left on the Table

    Authors: Louisa Woodhouse and Bill DeBaun

    Source: National College Attainment Network

    Pell Grants have long supported low-income students as they pursue higher education, increasing the financial capabilities and academic opportunities afforded to students. However, receiving federal financial aid through Pell Grants is dependent on filing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which can serve as a barrier to students.

    The National College Attainment Network (NCAN) has published a report on the unclaimed Pell Grants left on the table by high school graduates. Approximately 830,000 Pell Grant-eligible students did not complete FAFSA in the 2024 cycle, resulting in nearly $4.4 billion in unclaimed Pell Grant awards. These unclaimed funds are valuable to both students and states, with the ability to further the educational pursuits of low-income students and strengthen state economies.

    NCAN has run reports detailing the value of unclaimed Pell Grants over the past four years. Typically, nearly 60 percent of high school graduates complete the FAFSA by June 30, with completion rates trailing off markedly as students begin their summer.

    However, due to the technical challenges and delayed launch of FAFSA that occurred in the 2024 cycle, by the end of June, only 50 percent of high school graduates had completed the form. By August 30, 57 percent of students had filed the FAFSA, decreasing the amount of financial aid left on the table. The implications are clear: hindrance to the financial aid application process, whether that be through technical difficulties, decreased assistance, or short staffing, can result in many students losing access to Pell Grant funds.

    The impact of lower FAFSA completion rates, and therefore more unclaimed Pell Grants, is not felt exclusively by students but by states as well. In 2024, students in California and Texas each left nearly $550 million in Pell Grant awards unclaimed. While these states lose the most when FAFSA completion rates are low, they also stand to gain the most if completion rates increase.

    Analysis from NCAN finds that if FAFSA completion rates had increased by an additional 10 percentage points this year, California would have seen a $145 million increase in Pell Grant awards while Texas would have received an additional $130 million. The additional federal aid could translate into more students attending postsecondary institutions, filling workforce gaps and strengthening the states’ economies.

    In establishing the significance of increasing FAFSA filing rates for low-income students, NCAN offers commentary on how states can better support students, especially in the wake of potential policy changes directed at higher education. States can fund FAFSA completion efforts, providing additional in-school and online resources for students to access when filing. Additionally, FAFSA data sharing among states may enable high school counselors and local college access partners to better target students that could benefit from additional assistance.

    To read more about unclaimed Pell Grants and the role states can play on bolstering FAFSA completion rates, click here.

    —Julia Napier


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link