Tag: support

  • Catapult Learning is Awarded Tutoring Program Design Badge from Stanford University’s National Student Support Accelerator

    Catapult Learning is Awarded Tutoring Program Design Badge from Stanford University’s National Student Support Accelerator

    Organization recognized for excellence in high-impact tutoring design and student achievement gains

    PHILADELPHIA, Aug. 25, 2025 – Catapult Learning, a division of FullBloom that provides academic intervention programs for students and professional development solutions for teachers in K-12 schools, today announced it earned the Tutoring Program Design Badge from the National Student Support Accelerator (NSSA) at Stanford University. The designation, valid for three years, recognizes tutoring providers that demonstrate high-quality, research-aligned program design.

    The recognition comes at a time when the need for high-impact tutoring (HIT) has never been greater. As schools nationwide work to close learning gaps that widened during the COVID-19 pandemic and accelerate recovery, Catapult Learning stands out for its nearly 50-year legacy of delivering effective academic support to students who need it most.

    “Catapult Learning is honored to receive this prestigious national recognition from the NSSA at Stanford University,” said Rob Klapper, president at Catapult Learning. “We are excited to be recognized for our high-impact tutoring program design and will continue to uphold the highest standards of excellence as we support learners across the country.” 

    Each year, Catapult Learning’s programs support more than 150,000+ students with nearly four million in-person tutoring sessions, in partnership with 2,100 schools and districts nationwide. Its tutors, many of whom hold four-year degrees, are highly trained professionals who are supported with ongoing coaching and professional development.

    Recent data from Catapult Learning’s HIT programs show strong academic gains across both math and reading subject areas:

    • 8 out of every 10 math students increased their pre/post score
    • 9 out of every 10 reading students increased their pre/post score

    These results come from programs that have also earned a Tier 2 evidence designation under the Every Student Succeeds Act, affirming their alignment with rigorous research standards. 

    The Badge was awarded following a rigorous, evidence-based review conducted by an independent panel of education experts. The NSSA evaluated multiple components of Catapult Learning’s program – including instructional design, tutor training and support, and the use of data to inform instruction – against its Tutoring Quality Standards.

    “This designation underscores the strength and intentionality behind our high-impact tutoring model,” said Devon Wible, vice president of teaching and learning at Catapult Learning. “This achievement reflects our deep commitment to providing high-quality, research-based tutoring that drives meaningful outcomes for learners.”

    Tutoring is available in person, virtually, or in hybrid formats, and can be scheduled before, during, or after school, including weekends. Sessions are held a minimum of three times per week, with flexible options tailored to the needs of each school or district. Catapult Learning provides all necessary materials for both students and tutors.

    To learn more about Catapult Learning’s high-impact tutoring offerings, visit: https://catapultlearning.com/high-impact-tutoring/.

    About Catapult Learning

    Catapult Learning, a division of FullBloom, provides academic intervention programs for students and professional development solutions for teachers in K-12 schools, executed by a team of experienced coaches. Our professional development services strengthen the capacity of teachers and leaders to raise and sustain student achievement. Our academic intervention programs support struggling learners with instruction tailored to the unique needs of each student. Across the country, Catapult Learning partners with 500+ school districts to produce positive outcomes that promote academic and professional growth. Catapult Learning is accredited by Cognia and has earned its 2022 System of Distinction honor.  

    Latest posts by eSchool News Contributor (see all)

    Source link

  • Colleges Expect to Reduce Student Support Budgets

    Colleges Expect to Reduce Student Support Budgets

    College and university staff often bemoan that they’re being asked to do more with less, and a recent survey underscores that sentiment. Thirty percent of institutions surveyed by Tyton Partners expect decreases of greater than 2 percent to their student support budgets over the next three academic years, while fewer than 25 percent expect an increase in budgets.

    Financial pressures are tied in part to declining enrollments, as well as to changes in federal structures that reduce access to aid, according to the report.

    Eighty percent of institutions expect budgets for support services in enrollment and admissions to shrink, and 50 percent anticipate cuts to student support services. Other student-facing offices expecting declines are academic program delivery and innovation (33 percent), career readiness (29 percent), and research development and funding (20 percent).

    Threats to international student enrollment and visa complications could also significantly harm institutional resources and student success efforts; nearly 50 percent of four-year institutions cited international enrollment as critical to sustaining support budgets.

    Executive orders and state legislation limiting efforts to support specific racial, ethnic and gender minorities have also reduced institutional investment in identity-based programs. Forty-four percent of public four-year colleges have seen programming for affinity groups decrease over the past 12 months, compared to 28 percent of two-year colleges and 25 percent of private four-year colleges.

    While financial threats may hamper institutions’ ability to increase or scale offerings, a majority of student respondents said they’re not using the resources available on campus at this time anyway.

    Students say they don’t take advantage of the support offices because they don’t see the relevancy (42 percent), because they doubt the service would be helpful, have not needed the service or want to do things on their own. Thirty percent said the services were offered at inconvenient hours, lacked walk-in appointments or had no flexibility in modality.

    Methodology

    Tyton Partners’ “Driving Toward a Degree” report includes responses from 468 administrators, 1,100 front-line support staff members, 1,038 four-year students and 403 community college students. The study was fielded in the spring. Those at public four-year colleges made up the greatest share of respondents, followed by private four-year institutions and two-year colleges.

    Affordability: When administrators were asked how they’d respond to federal financial aid cuts during a time of financial constraint, 41 percent of public four-year colleges said they plan to expand institutional aid to offset students’ lost funding, compared to 25 percent of two-year colleges and 30 percent of private four-year institutions. Four-year private colleges and universities also reported re-evaluating enrollment strategies based on aid dependency, raising concerns about access for low-income students who may not be able to pay the full price of tuition, according to the report.

    Students say financial aid and support are critical to their retention; previous studies point to cost being one of the top reasons why a student leaves higher education. Over half of students (59 percent) in Tyton’s report said financial aid counseling is very important to their decision to re-enroll, compared to 52 percent who indicated academic registration was very important and 49 percent who cited mental health counseling.

    Staffing constraints: Retaining support staff is another challenge that institutions reported; over 60 percent say they’re having a hard time filling vacancies or face hiring freezes in support departments.

    For many students, academic advising is a cornerstone of success in higher education, but many departments are under stress due to high caseloads (42 percent) and frequent turnover in staff (31 percent), according to the report. Despite these headwinds, 74 percent of public four-year institutions and 72 percent of large institutions (those with more than 10,000 undergraduates) plan to increase the caseloads of staff members to recoup lost revenue.

    “Gaps in staffing directly erode advising capacity and quality,” the report authors wrote. “Our survey shows that advisers managing caseloads of 300 or more students are not only less able to engage regularly with those they serve but also more likely to leave their roles. This dynamic fuels a cycle of turnover and declining support quality, undermining institutions’ ability to sustain consistent, high-impact advising.”

    Other popular strategies institutions may employ to combat staffing challenges include reassigning duties across departments, reducing or delaying services, or shifting services to peer advisers or part-time staff members.

    To combat large caseloads, some institutions are considering implementing structured group advising sessions and developing flexible capacity for peak times, the survey noted.

    Source link

  • Smarter Support: How to Use AI in Online Courses and Teach Your Students to Use It Too – Faculty Focus

    Smarter Support: How to Use AI in Online Courses and Teach Your Students to Use It Too – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Smarter Support: How to Use AI in Online Courses and Teach Your Students to Use It Too – Faculty Focus

    Smarter Support: How to Use AI in Online Courses and Teach Your Students to Use It Too – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Wide-ranging coalition of ‘friends of the court’ continue to support citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal in her return to the Supreme Court

    Wide-ranging coalition of ‘friends of the court’ continue to support citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal in her return to the Supreme Court

    The government can’t jail a journalist for asking a question. And when it does, it can’t get away with it scot-free. But that’s what happened to the police and prosecutors who arrested citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal when she asked an officer questions in the course of reporting the news. 

    It was unconstitutional enough that these Laredo, Texas, officials arrested Priscilla for routine journalism — something freedom-loving Americans know the First Amendment protects. Even worse, they did so because she criticized them. And to further their plan to arrest Priscilla, they deployed a Texas penal statute aimed at curbing abuses of office —and one that Laredo officials had never before tried to enforce in its 23-year history. 

    After the Fifth Circuit denied Priscilla relief for her constitutional injury, the Supreme Court granted her petition and tossed out the Fifth Circuit’s decision. The Court ordered the Fifth Circuit to reconsider her case in light of an earlier ruling. But after the Fifth Circuit mostly reinstated its previous ruling, Priscilla and FIRE once again asked the Supreme Court to intervene. 

    Supporting Priscilla in front of the high court is an impressive and diverse coalition of media organizations, journalists, and defenders of civil liberties. These 11 amicus curiae briefs urge the Supreme Court to reverse the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in order to protect Americans’ First Amendment right to investigate and report the news and to ensure that officials can be held accountable when they infringe on that obvious right. 

    These reporters and media organizations wrote about how this important First Amendment case will impact the rights of all journalists:

    • The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 24 news organizations including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Dow Jones & Company (owner of The Wall Street Journal) demonstrate how history shows that “no technique has been more routine or central to newsgathering — from the Founding through the present day — than pursuing information about government affairs simply by asking for it.” In addition to attorneys from the Reporters Committee, the media coalition is also represented by Jackson Walker LLP.
    • The MuckRock Foundation, an organization that drives public records requests across the country, is a nonprofit that assists the public in filing governmental requests for public records and then publishes the returned information on its website for public access. Journalists routinely use records MuckRock publishes to expose government corruption, misuse of government funds, and other matters of public concern. MuckRock’s brief warns that if upheld, “the Fifth Circuit’s decision will encourage other government officials, both high and petty, to harass, threaten, and arrest people for requesting information that the government would prefer not to release — even if the government may lawfully release the information under state law.” MuckRock is represented by Prince Lobel Tye LLP.
    • A group of five current and former journalists — David Barstow, Kathleen McElroy, Walter Robinson, John Schwartz, and Jacob Sullum — emphasizes that no reasonable official would have thought Priscilla’s basic reporting practice was criminal. They also use real-life examples to demonstrate that “journalists cannot do their jobs if they must fear that any interaction with the government — even a simple request for truthful, factual information — may be used as a pretext for an arrest and criminal prosecution.” The journalists are represented by counsel at Covington & Burling LLP.
    • The Dallas Free Press submitted a brief with Avi Adelman and Steven Monacelli, two independent journalists who, like Priscilla, have been arrested or detained while reporting on law enforcement. The brief details how when faced with “closed doors and empty mailboxes … journalists must develop alternative sources to perform their job — a public service indispensable to our democracy.” And if communicating with these sources could result in arrest, independent journalists “are especially vulnerable … given that they may lack the resources and institutional backing of a larger news outlet in the event that they are prosecuted.” The Dallas Free Press, Adelman, and Monacelli are represented by the SMU Dedman School of Law First Amendment Clinic, Thomas Leatherbury, and Vinson & Elkins LLP.

    This impressive group of organizations across the ideological spectrum wrote to emphasize the problems with applying qualified immunity in cases like Priscilla’s:

    • First Liberty Institute explains that “the government arresting a journalist for asking questions so obviously violates the First Amendment that no reasonable official would sanction such an action.” And FLI points out that “it comes as no surprise that there is no case directly on point with the facts here” because “these sorts of outrageous fact patterns are more frequently found in law school exams than in real life.” FLI is represented by Dentons Bingham Greenbaum LLP.
    • The Americans for Prosperity Foundation articulates that qualified immunity is inappropriate when it shields government officials from liability for “intentional and slow-moving” infringements of First Amendment rights. Moreover, AFPF argues, qualified immunity especially threatens constitutional rights when officials enforce rarely-used statues, because “the more obscure the state law, the less likely it is that a prior case was decided on a similar set of facts.”
    • The Law Enforcement Action Partnership — whose members include police, prosecutors, and other law-enforcement officials — stress that the Supreme Court “has consistently held that qualified immunity does not shield obvious violations of bedrock constitutional guarantees.” The brief observes that “the dramatic expansion of criminal codes across the country has made it easier than ever” for law enforcement to pretextually arrest someone as punishment for exercising their First Amendment rights. LEAP is represented by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP.
    • Young America’s Foundation and the Manhattan Institute highlight that “the First Amendment’s guarantees limit state law, not the other way around.” Their brief also explains how the Fifth Circuit’s failure to recognize decades of Supreme Court precedent protecting “routine news-gathering activities under the First Amendment … erodes essential free-speech and free-press rights.” YAF and the Manhattan Institute are represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom and The Dhillon Law Group.
    • The Institute for Justice urges reversal of the Fifth Circuit’s decision because “it undermines the text and original meaning of Section 1983,” which protects constitutional rights when violated “under color of” state laws and “notwithstanding” state laws that purport to limit those rights. IJ also stresses that the Fifth Circuit’s application of qualified immunity in the context of an obvious constitutional violation “is inconsistent with the prudential rationale underlying qualified immunity: the carefully calibrated balancing of government and individual interests.”  
    • The Constitutional Accountability Center details the history of Section 1983 and cautions that because “qualified immunity is at odds with Section 1983’s text and history, courts should be especially careful to respect the limits on the doctrine.” CAC points out that this is an especially inapt case for qualified immunity because Section 1983 was adopted precisely to combat things like the criminalization of speech by pre-war slave codes and retaliatory prosecutions against critics of slavery.
    • The Cato Institute underlines that in the context of qualified immunity, “clearly established law is an objective inquiry of reasonableness, not a blind reliance on a lack of judicial precedent.” Cato also warns that “freedom of the press cannot meaningfully exist if journalists are not allowed to seek information from government officials.”

    Priscilla and FIRE are exceedingly grateful for the support of this diverse and formidable amicus coalition. With this support, she is hopeful the Supreme Court will hold that journalists — and all Americans — can seek information from government officials without risking arrest. 

    Source link

  • Post-pandemic, student academic recovery remains elusive

    Post-pandemic, student academic recovery remains elusive

    Key points:

    Five years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, academic recovery has stalled nationwide, and achievement gaps have widened, according to the State of Student Learning 2025 report from from Curriculum Associates.

    The report offers one of the most comprehensive looks at Grades K–8 student performance in reading and mathematics, based on data from close to 14 million students who took the i-Ready Diagnostic assessment in the 2024–2025 school year.

    The report shows that most students have not yet reached pre-pandemic achievement levels, and some are falling even further behind. The report does find some bright spots: Some historically underserved schools, especially majority-Black schools, are seeing modest, positive gains in both reading and mathematics. However, those gains have not yet translated into closing longstanding disparities.

    “This report shows that disrupted schooling due to the pandemic continues to impact student learning, particularly for students who are in early grades, are lower performing, or are from historically underserved communities,” said Kristen Huff, head of measurement at Curriculum Associates. “Academic recovery has never been one-size-fits-all, and these results reaffirm the importance of nuanced, data-informed approaches. Above all, they underscore the vital work educators are doing every day to meet students where they are and help them move forward.”

    Key findings

    • Academic progress has plateaued. Since spring 2023, national achievement has remained flat. While many students are growing at pre-pandemic rates, that growth isn’t closing the gap caused by pandemic disruptions.
    • The achievement gap has grown in many cases. Students who were already behind, particularly those scoring in the bottom 10th percentile, continue to fall behind, while top-performing students have often recovered or surpassed their pre-pandemic levels.
    • Younger students experienced greater learning losses. Even though they were not yet in school during the pandemic, elementary students, especially in Grades K and 1, saw the largest drops in achievement after the pandemic. 
    • Vulnerable populations are experiencing uneven recovery. The report shows widening gaps between the nation’s highest and lowest performers. Across most grades, the differences between higher and lower percentiles have increased over time.

    A data-driven, nationwide look

    The 2025 report examines data through the critical years pre- and post-pandemic, from spring 2019 to spring 2025. Using a nationally representative sample of more than 11.7 million reading and 13.4 million mathematics assessments, the research examines:

    • Grade-level placement: how many students are performing at or below grade level
    • Scale scores by percentile: how learning differs across performance groups
    • Annual growth: whether students are making enough academic progress during the school year to recover lost ground

    The findings reinforce that targeted support is needed to ensure every student can thrive academically, especially younger students, lower-performing students, and historically underserved communities.

    This press release originally appeared online.

    eSchool News Staff
    Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

    Source link

  • 4 tips to support the literacy needs of middle and high school students

    4 tips to support the literacy needs of middle and high school students

    Key points:

    Today’s middle schoolers continue to struggle post-pandemic to read and write at the level needed to successfully navigate more complex academic content in the upper grades and beyond, according to a new report from NWEA, a K-12 assessment and research organization.

    Based on NWEA’s research, current 8th graders would need close to a full academic year of additional instruction to catch up to their pre-pandemic peers in reading. This trend was reiterated in recent assessment results from the National Assessment on Educational Progress (NAEP), with only 30 percent of eighth-grade students performing at or above the NAEP proficient level.

    While early literacy initiatives have garnered attention in recent years, the fact remains that many students struggle to read and are not prepared for the rigors of middle school. Students quickly find themselves challenged to keep up as they no longer receive explicit, structured reading instruction, even as they are expected to comprehend increasingly complex materials across subjects, like science, history, or English Language Arts.

    The report, Policy recommendations for addressing the middle school reading crisis, is co-authored by Miah Daughtery, EdD, NWEA VP of Academic Advocacy at HMH (NWEA’s parent company), and Chad Aldeman, founder of Read Not Guess.

    “Our current middle and high schoolers were just starting their literacy journey when the pandemic hit, and we cannot lessen the urgency to support them. But, middle school literacy is complex even for students who are reading on grade level. This demands intentional, well-funded, and focused policy leadership that includes support across the K-12 spectrum,” said Daughtery. “Simply put, learning to read is not done when a student exits elementary school; support cannot stop there either.”

    Policymakers and district leaders must adopt a systems-level approach that supports both early learners and the unique literacy needs of middle and high school students.

    The new report provides four components that can be leveraged to make this happen:

    1. Use high-quality, grade-appropriate assessments that provide specific data on the literacy needs of middle schoolers.
    2. Look at flexible scheduling and policies that promote literacy development throughout the entire school day and help districts more effectively use instructional time.
    3. Understand and support the unique literacy needs of middle schoolers across subjects and disciplines from a systems perspective and invest in teacher professional learning in all disciplines, including at the upper grades, within state and district literacy plans.
    4. Curate relationships with external partners, like community organizations and nonprofits, who share similar goals in improving literacy outcomes, and can both support and reinforce literacy development, stretching beyond the school’s hours and resources.
    eSchool News Staff
    Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

    Source link

  • Adding a trauma-responsive lens for student support

    Adding a trauma-responsive lens for student support

    Key points:

    Across the country, our schools are being taxed beyond their capacity to support educational success. We’ve known for a long time that students need a three-dimensional structure of guidance and encouragement to thrive. That’s why the Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework was created–it’s a prevention framework for early identification of varying student needs and the responses needed to maximize academic success. In theory, an MTSS supports academic, social-emotional, and behavioral needs in equal measure. However, in practice, many schools are struggling to incorporate social-emotional and behavioral components in their MTSS–even as many of their students come to school bearing the effects of adversity, trauma, or crisis.

    This imbalance is leaving millions of children behind.

    Each year, at least 1 in 7 children in the United States experience abuse, violence, natural disasters, or other adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). By age 16, roughly two-thirds of children will have been exposed to at least one traumatic event. This can impair their ability to learn well and contribute to absenteeism, while secondary trauma spirals out from these students to classmates and teachers, multiplying the overall impact. Left unaddressed, the imprint of such events could warp the future of our school and public communities.

    Since COVID-19, schools have reported unprecedented levels of absenteeism and student distress, and supporting trauma-exposed students without training puts more pressure on teachers, who are already burned out and leaving the profession at high rates. Therefore, it is clear to me that creating school-wide networks of trauma-informed adults is essential for fostering supportive learning and growth for students, enhancing educator capacity to nurture trauma-affected learners, and ensuring effective trauma resource management within districts.

    Research has identified a supportive school community as a strong childhood protective factor against the effects of trauma. We should be hopeful about our path forward. But the vision and blueprint for this enhancement of MTSS need to come as soon as possible, and it needs to come from state-level education leaders and school district leaders.

    Gaps in support and expertise

    Consider this scenario: A student who recently experienced a traumatic car accident sits near a window in class, experiencing significant distress or dysregulation without outward signs. A sudden screech of tires outside activates their sympathetic nervous system (the one associated with fight or flight), and the student shuts down, withdrawing into themselves. Their teacher, unaware of the student’s trauma history and unequipped with relevant training, interprets the response as a continuation of past misbehavior or as an academic deficit.

    This sort of misunderstanding takes place in a thousand places every day. I would stress that this isn’t a reflection of bad intentions, but rather a symptom of fragmented systems and knowledge. Even when trauma is recognized, lack of intentional collaboration and training often result in missed opportunities or inconsistent support, which cannot maximize recovery from trauma and may, in fact, hinder it, as research on retraumatization suggests.

    There might be mismatched expectations when teachers send students to the counselor, not knowing that they themselves have a role to play in the healing. In other cases, students may be referred to a school counselor and have a productive support session–but on their way back to class, a seemingly benign statement from a third party can be misconstrued or cause dysregulation, unintentionally undoing the support they’ve received. The solution to all these problems is school-wide training on trauma-informed skills. This way, all educators and staff alike develop a shared knowledge, understanding, language, and responses as they collaborate and connect with students. With the right tools, adults on campus have better trauma-informed strategies to use in their relationships with students and in building a safe and supportive school community.

    The proof is all around us

    Trauma training works synergistically within MTSS: social-emotional and trauma-responsive support allows for better academic outcomes, which work to further reduce behavioral problems, and so on. At the Center for Safe & Resilient Schools and Workplaces, we see this play out often with our school district partners. For example, at Pasadena Unified School District, which was recently ravaged by the Eaton Canyon Fire, trauma-informed best practices and preparations have enabled district leaders to reopen schools with sufficient psychological understanding and interventions along with the needed material support for the 10,000 students who were affected.

    A truly effective MTSS model does not treat trauma as a peripheral concern. It integrates trauma-responsive strategies into every tier of support–from universal practices, to targeted interventions, to intensive mental health services. In that environment, every adult who comes in contact with students has the training to adhere to trauma best practices.

    We are at a juncture where the impact of trauma poses serious risks to the education system, but evidence-based approaches exist to solve the problem. Change from the state level down is the best way to transform school cultures quickly, and I urge state education leaders to take action. Any MTSS plan isn’t complete without a trauma-informed foundation, lens, and programming. And our students–each and every one–deserve nothing less.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Limited resources at underserved schools can keep students from getting the support they need

    Limited resources at underserved schools can keep students from getting the support they need

    As the first in my family to attend college, I felt a profound commitment to excel academically and gain admission to a top university. Growing up amid the hustle and bustle of Silicon Valley, I always envisioned a bright future ahead, with college at the forefront of my goals since elementary school.

    At my Title I elementary and middle schools, student-to-teacher ratios were even higher than those listed online. There was a lack of classroom technology and resources like history textbooks. Our two middle school counselors each managed students by the hundreds, making it nearly impossible for them to keep track of individual academic progress and educational goals. Afterward, I attended a private high school, thanks to support from my family. Our caring teachers made the effort to get to know each student, and dedicated counselors advocated for me when it mattered most.

    Yet when conversations about college came around, navigating the complex system was difficult. I had to chart my own path to success through independent research, often looking at data that was scattered and inconsistent. It hindered my ability to educate myself on college-going rates, costs, outcomes and employment prospects post-graduation.

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

    Limited resources available at many underserved schools across the nation make it a more challenging environment for students to get support and excel, thus limiting their true academic potential.

    In my senior year of high school, after gaining newfound confidence while serving as a commissioner at-large in my county’s youth commission, I decided to try to challenge the status quo in higher education through the power of data and find a way to speak up for other first-generation students who find themselves interacting with systems not designed with their experiences in mind. My mentors at a regional food bank where I volunteered shaped me to lead with confidence and heart.

    When I received my admission letter from the University of California, Berkeley, I felt deeply honored to earn a place at one of the world’s leading research and teaching institutions.

    I am now an advisory board member of the recently formed California Cradle-to-Career Data System, the state’s longitudinal system that connects education and career outcomes data in one central place. I have learned firsthand that the resources available for students to gauge their potential postgraduate earnings often rely on self-submitted data or estimates, rather than on an accurate overview of college and career outcomes.

    Related: To better serve first-generation students, expand the definition

    As part of this work, I am now helping my state’s leaders develop tools like the Student Pathways dashboard, which provides insights on the higher education options available to students after high school.

    The tool provides information on a single website for everyone to access at any time. By streamlining access to this data, it allows students and the adults helping them to easily pinpoint which types of degrees or certifications are right for them, which may lead to employment opportunities where they live and which colleges or universities the students’ classmates are headed to.

    Students need access that can help them map out their futures — whether they hope to attend college, earn a certificate or enter the workforce directly after high school. Using data in the pathways tool can clarify how others have navigated to and through college and hopefully help students chart their own paths.

    As the youngest advisory board member, I have the opportunity to provide proposals and recommendations from a student’s perspective on how the system can engage with communities to make its data more accessible. Community engagement involves ensuring that Californians are aware of the data system, can understand and interpret the available data and have an opportunity to share their feedback.

    I often think about how the countless hours I spent trying to find information to help guide my goals and decision-making were both a burden and barrier to attending college. I know firsthand how the power of data can help build a successful future.

    Today, many first-generation and low-income college students do not have the opportunity to assess which pathways will yield the most fruit. I’m confident that with accessible facts and data for our decision-making, we can confidently forge the paths that will bring our dreams to life.

    Mike Nguyen is a rising junior studying business administration and science, technology, and society at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley. This piece was written in collaboration with Alexis Takagi, a basic needs coordinator at Santa Clara University. Both Nguyen and Takagi are advisory board members of the California Cradle-to-Career Data System.

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected].

    This story first-generation college students was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link

  • Massachusetts governor pitches $400M to support research funding

    Massachusetts governor pitches $400M to support research funding

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

    Dive Brief: 

    • Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey has announced plans to propose legislation that would devote $400 million to support research across the state amid federal funding uncertainty. 
    • The money would be split evenly across two funds: a multiyear research funding pool to support projects at universities, hospitals and research institutions, and an additional funding reserve to support research and jobs at the state’s public colleges. 
    • “In the face of uncertainty from the federal government, this is about protecting one of the things that makes Massachusetts so special — our global leadership in health care and helping families across the world,” Healey said in the Thursday announcement. 

    Dive Insight: 

    Healey’s proposal comes as the Trump administration freezes and terminates research grants at universities in its crosshairs to pressure them into making policy changes, along with cutting funding more broadly across major scientific agencies. 

    In Massachusetts alone, the Trump administration has terminated research grants valued at nearly $583 million, according to a recent analysis from the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. When they were canceled, the grants had $252 million left to be paid out. 

    Overall, the Trump administration has terminated research awards valued at roughly $6.9 billion across the U.S., the analysis found. Of that, $3.3 billion of the canceled funding hadn’t yet been disbursed. The analysis did not account for frozen research grants, suggesting the level of hampered research funding across the nation may rise even higher. 

    Healey’s announcement pointed to the state’s economic reliance on federal research funding. The state received nearly $8.6 billion in federal research funding in fiscal year 2024, which supported roughly 81,000 jobs and $7.8 billion in household income, recent findings from the University of Massachusetts Amherst found. 

    Moreover, Massachusetts accounts for 1 in 10 research and development jobs in the U.S., according to the announcement. 

    Half of the $400 million would go toward a one-time funding pool to help pay for projects at universities, hospitals and research institutions. This pool would also support a one-year fellowship program for early-career researchers, the announcement said. 

    That pot of money would be housed at MassDevelopment, the state’s development finance agency, and Massachusetts would use interest from its state stabilization fund to finance it. 

    The other half of the $400 million would be housed in a bridge funding reserve for the state’s public colleges. That funding would support research costs, partnerships and jobs, including positions for graduate and postdoctorate students. 

    That fund would be paid for from revenue from Massachusetts’ Fair Share, which adds a 4% tax on those with incomes above $1 million. 

    Several university leaders in the state praised the proposal. They include the president of the University of Massachusetts, the state’s public university system, as well as leaders of private institutions including Boston University, Northeastern University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 

    “Advances that spring from our universities, hospitals and laboratories benefit all Americans; if we see these institutions diminished or compromised, all Americans stand to lose,” MIT President Sally Kornbluth said in a statement on Thursday. 

    However, Kornbluth noted that “no other source can replace federal funding for sheer scale.”

    MIT has seen over $6 million worth of federal grants terminated, according to Center for American Progress data. 

    Massachusetts is also home to Harvard University, which the Trump administration has cut off from all future federal research funding. Earlier this month, Harvard officials said the Trump administration’s actions combined with recent congressional moves, such as raising the endowment tax wealthy institutions pay, could cost the university $1 billion a year.

    Source link