Tag: survey

  • SHEEO Releases Annual State Priorities Survey

    SHEEO Releases Annual State Priorities Survey

    Affordability has always been a buzzword for lawmakers on Capitol Hill, but polling shows that it’s becoming increasingly popular among state higher education agencies as well.

    According to the latest annual State Priorities survey from the State Higher Education Executive Officers, college affordability jumped from the sixth-most-important policy issue among higher ed executives in 2025 to the second most this year.

    SHEEO researchers emphasized that affordability has “consistently [been] among the top priorities” for the roughly 45 state executives surveyed each year; the average score from respondents this year only increased 0.1 points on a 1-to-5 scale. Nonetheless, they agreed that the increase represents a significant and timely change—one that was likely influenced by the political climate in Washington.

    “Affordability is the key overarching issue for policymakers heading into the 2026 midterm election, and state higher education leaders are certainly not immune from pressure to lower costs,” said Tom Harnisch, SHEEO’s vice president for government relations. “So there’s going to be, I foresee, continued legislative efforts to hold the line on tuition, make increased investments in financial aid and address other areas that are related to college costs.”

    The increased focus on affordability has also been reflected in state legislation; 33 states indicated that they had instituted a tuition freeze and/or limit in at least one public higher education sector in the past five years. Another 20 have considered legislation to create or expand statewide promise programs, which provide free or significantly reduced college tuition for eligible students.

    But state systems still have work to do to address public concerns. Roughly 60 percent of all adults say cost is the biggest barrier preventing students from enrolling in or completing a postsecondary degree, according to a report from the left-leaning think tank New America.

    Other key policy issues include economic and workforce development (which held its place at No. 1), higher education’s value proposition (No. 3), and college completion/student success (No. 5), the SHEEO survey shows. A topic that had not previously been included in SHEEO surveys also gained prominence this year: state impacts from federal policy changes, which placed sixth on the list of 25 issues.

    Collectively, Harnisch said, this year’s results, and the relatively consistent results of recent years, reflect a slow but steady transition concerning who is responsible for bearing the cost of college.

    “It just shows the overarching cost shift from states to students, and associated with that cost shift is the need for students to get a job, to help pay for their education and associated student debt,” he explained. “These are all downstream effects of that.”

    SHEEO researchers also noted that while state budgets for higher ed range widely, funding has declined over all since the COVID-19 pandemic and its “record state budget surpluses.” The major funding cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will likely only make higher education budgets tighter, they added.

    “Many states with biannual budgets set them in 2025, so they will not be in budget sessions again until 2027. But those states that do have budgets in 2026 are more likely to face changes, and higher education is often most vulnerable to those changes,” Harnisch said. “So as more states have budget shortfalls, revenue growth is softening and there’s increased competition for limited state funding, states are going to be increasingly challenged on the affordability front.”

    Still, despite looming budget cuts, “unstable federal funding streams and intensifying state and federal political pressures,” SHEEO says there are reasons for optimism.

    Concerns about completion of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid dropped nine spots to the 18th-most-important issue for higher leaders this year. And despite the looming predictions of a major demographic cliff, which is slated to take effect in 2026, enrollment declines dropped from the seventh-most-important issue in 2025 to 16th most important this year.

    If anything, SHEEO hopes that enrollment will continue to climb as students pursuing eligible short-term education and training programs gain access to Pell Grants for the first time starting on July 1, under a new program called Workforce Pell.

    “[The year] 2026 holds a lot of unknowns as we look to see what state legislators will prioritize and how changes at the federal level will impact states,” Harnisch said in a news release about the report. But as “economic and workforce development continues to be top of mind, and with the implementation of Workforce Pell rolling out later this year, we’re optimistic that states will continue to make advances in addressing workforce needs.”

    Source link

  • Tips for Making a Student Interest Survey

    Tips for Making a Student Interest Survey

    Understanding what motivates and excites students is at the heart of teaching. Whether it’s discovering their favorite hobbies, their goals, or the way they prefer to learn, gathering this kind of data helps educators tailor lessons that truly connect with their students. One of the best ways to gather this information is through student interest surveys. 

    With interest surveys for students, you can collect actionable information to use throughout the school year. You can make a student survey that is super simple and offers insights that can enhance classroom engagement, strengthen relationships, and support differentiated instruction, too.

    What is a Student Interest Survey?

    A student interest survey is a tool designed to gather information about students’ preferences, hobbies, goals, and ways they like to learn. These surveys help educators better understand what motivates their students. You can use the information you gather to connect with students on a personal level and create lessons that resonate.

    For example:

    • In an elementary classroom, surveys might ask about favorite books, hobbies, or after-school activities.
    • In middle school, they might explore topics students are curious about within a subject area, like what parts of history or science excite them most.
    • For high school students, surveys can include questions about career interests or their preferred methods of learning, such as videos, group work, or hands-on activities.

    By tailoring the questions to the grade level and classroom context, you can design surveys that give you valuable insights about students.

    Why is Making a Student Interest Survey Important?

    Student interest surveys play a critical role in creating a positive and engaging learning environment. 

    Building Relationships

    Surveys show students that their opinions and interests are valued. This can foster trust and create a more inclusive and welcoming classroom culture. For example, if a student shares their passion for basketball, incorporating that into lessons can help them feel seen and appreciated. 

    Enhancing Engagement

    When lessons connect with students’ interests, their engagement can increase. A math problem involving sports statistics or a science experiment about underwater habitats can make abstract concepts more relatable and exciting.

    If you’ve joined me for a webinar or workshop this year, you might have seen the example I often share about using a chatbot to generate activity ideas based on student interest. I often demo the prompt, “I’m teaching [topic] to [grade], and they love [interests]. Make a list of connections that can help them stay engaged and retain knowledge.”

    Supporting Differentiation

    Surveys can help educators adapt teaching strategies to address the different ways kids like to learn. For instance, if a student prefers independent work over group activities, you can use this information to guide project assignments or seating arrangements.

    What to Include When Making a Student Interest Survey

    A well-designed survey gathers a mix of personal, academic, and classroom-specific information. Here are a few things to include:

    1. General Information: Start with basics like name, class period, and favorite subjects.
    2. Personal Interests: Ask about hobbies, favorite books or movies, and extracurricular activities. Open-ended questions work well here, but younger students might benefit from multiple-choice options.
    3. Learning Preferences: Include questions about group work versus individual tasks, preferred classroom activities, and how students like to receive information (e.g., videos, reading, hands-on projects).
    4. Goals and Aspirations: These could range from short-term academic goals to long-term career interests. For example, high schoolers might share their dream jobs, while elementary students could talk about a skill they hope to master.
    5. Classroom-Specific Questions:
      • Elementary: “What’s your favorite part of the school day?”
      • Middle School: “If you could learn about anything, what would it be?”
      • High School: “What skills do you hope to gain this year?”
    6. Optional Questions: Questions like “What’s something you wish your teacher knew about you?” can provide deeper insights and open doors for meaningful conversations.

    Using Digital Tools for Efficiency

    Digital tools make creating and analyzing surveys faster and more efficient. Platforms like Google Forms, Jotform, and Microsoft Forms offer features like multiple-choice questions, dropdowns, and Likert scales. All of these can simplify the data collection process. These tools, and others like them, also automatically organize responses (like a Google Sheet), saving time for educators. 

    For younger students, tools like Padlet can be used to gather video or audio responses. You might also ask students to make a collage of their favorite things.

    4 Tips for Creating Effective Surveys

    To make sure your surveys give you actionable information, here are a few best practices to take into consideration.

    • Keep It Short: Limit surveys to 5–10 questions to avoid overwhelming students.
    • Use Clear Language: Adapt the wording to the age group. For younger students, you might want to provide examples or visuals to clarify questions.
    • Review the Data: Use visual charts or spreadsheets to identify trends and personalize your approach.
    • Follow Up: Let students know how their input will be used. Share how their responses are shaping lessons, group projects, or classroom routines.

    Making a Student Interest Survey

    Student interest surveys are a powerful tool for building connections, fostering engagement, and personalizing learning. By taking the time to understand what excites and motivates your students, you can create a classroom environment where every learner feels valued and inspired.

    Whether you’re designing your first survey or refining an existing one, remember that the ultimate goal is to use the insights gained to make meaningful changes. Start small, experiment with different formats, and, most importantly, show students that their voices matter!

    Do you have a student interest survey success story? Reply to my weekly newsletter (sign up here) and let me know all about it.

    Find more posts featuring personalized learning tips & resources:

    Source link

  • 7 in 10 employers have high confidence in higher ed, survey finds

    7 in 10 employers have high confidence in higher ed, survey finds

    Dive Brief: 

    • Seventy percent of employers nationwide said they have high confidence in higher education, according to a poll released Thursday from the American Association of Colleges and Universities and research firm Morning Consult. 
    • Three-quarters of Republican employers expressed high confidence in higher education, followed by 70% of Democrats and 55% of independents. That finding contrasts with other recent polls, which show Democrats viewing the sector more positively than Republicans. 
    • The survey suggests that employers hold colleges in higher esteem than the general public does. Just 42% of adults said they had high confidence in the higher education sector in a poll earlier this year from Gallup and Lumina Foundation. 

    Dive Insight: 

    The results from AAC&U and Morning Consult contrast sharply with recent surveys that show the public is continuing to question whether higher education is worth the price. In the new poll, nearly three-quarters of surveyed employers, 73%, said they believe a college degree is “definitely” or “somewhat” worth it. 

    Meanwhile, a recent NBC News poll found just one-third of registered voters adults agreed that a four-year degree is “worth the cost because people have a better chance to get a good job and earn more money over their lifetime.” That’s down from 53% of adults who said the same in 2013. 

    The results of the new poll suggest employers want college graduates to have a wide range of skills when they enter the workplace. Applying knowledge to the real world was the No. 1 skill desired, with 95% of employers agreeing that ability is “very” or “somewhat” important. 

    Similar shares of employers also said teamwork, oral and written communication, locating and evaluating information, analyzing and solving complex problems, critical thinking, and ethical judgment and decision-making were important skills. 

    In addition, employers indicated they want college graduates to have skills related to artificial intelligence. 

    More than 9 in 10 of the respondents said AI skills are very or somewhat important. A slightly smaller share, 81%, expressed confidence that colleges are helping students develop those skills.

    Employers indicated they’d be more likely to hire graduates who had hands-on experiences in college. When considering such experiences, employers were most likely to say completing an internship or apprenticeship, as well as holding a leadership role, would make them more likely to consider hiring a candidate. 

    Eight in 10 employers said they’d be very or somewhat more likely to hire someone with those experiences. 

    Around three-quarters of respondents also said they’d be more likely to hire graduates who participated with a community organization, worked with people from different backgrounds, acted as a peer mentor, held either an on- or off-campus job, or undertook research with the help of faculty. 

    Microcredentials are also becoming more popular with employers, with 81% saying they are somewhat or very valuable when making hiring decisions. Nearly half of employers, 47%, consider them as “evidence of proficiency for a technical skill.”

    However, only 22% of employers view them as a substitute for a college degree. 

    According to a report accompanying the survey, the results also suggest that employers “strongly support conditions that foster open dialogue, diverse perspectives, and students’ freedom to learn.”

    Nearly 9 in 10 employers agreed that “all topics should be open for discussion on college campuses.” And a similar share said they would view a degree more favorably if it came “from an institution known for respecting diverse perspectives.” 

    Additionally, a little more than 8 in 10 said they would have a more positive view of a degree from an institution “that was not subject to government restrictions on what students learn and discuss.” 

    The survey was administered online in August to a little over 1,000 employers, whom the survey defined as managers or higher at organizations that employ 25 or more workers. Nearly three-quarters were hiring managers, while the remainder were executives.

    Source link

  • Survey Warns of Student Debt “Default Cliff”

    Survey Warns of Student Debt “Default Cliff”

    A new survey of federal student loan borrowers by the Institute for College Access and Success, a nonprofit focused on college affordability, found that about a fifth of borrowers are currently in either delinquency or default.

    “These findings bring even greater urgency to ongoing concerns about a looming ‘default cliff,’ where an unprecedented number of borrowers struggle so much to repay their loans that they default on their payments in droves,” Michele Zampini, TICAS’s associate vice president for federal policy and advocacy, wrote in a blog post.

    The Department of Education itself acknowledged a potential default cliff in an August data release, Zampini noted, writing that, although no new borrowers had defaulted since payments were paused in March 2020, many delinquent borrowers were in danger of defaulting after that pause ended.

    Zampini also wrote that student loan default “comes with severe and punitive consequences.”

    Just over half of respondents (52 percent) said their debt has negatively affected their ability to save for retirement, and 45 percent said the same about their ability to find and afford housing. Slightly fewer participants said that their student loan debt was “worth it”—41 percent—than said it wasn’t, at 48 percent. Advanced degree holders were more likely to consider their debt “worth it” than those with an associate or bachelor’s degree, as were male borrowers compared to female borrowers.

    Source link

  • Reports – BEES Survey – CUPA-HR

    Reports – BEES Survey – CUPA-HR

    CUPA-HR Research is pleased to introduce redesigned Benefits, Employee Experience, and Structure (BEES) Survey reports in DataOnDemand. Our new reports feature a fresh look and feel and now include charts for most variables. Charts make it easier than ever to share the latest trends with leadership and teammates so you can continue to build and maintain competitive employee experience and benefits packages. Even better — your institution still has time to earn your discount on 2026 BEES DataOnDemand by participating in the BEES Survey.

    If your institution already subscribes to BEES DataOnDemand, log in to DataOnDemand to see the above chart for your peers (as opposed to all institutions that contributed data). If your institution has a BEES subscription, but you don’t have access, have your CHRO or primary CUPA-HR contact assign you access using these steps. Finally, if your institution does not currently have a BEES DataOnDemand subscription, consider participating in the BEES Survey to get a discount on 2026 BEES DataOnDemand.

    Source link

  • New international enrollment dipped this fall, NAFSA survey finds

    New international enrollment dipped this fall, NAFSA survey finds

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Many U.S. colleges are experiencing declines in undergraduate and graduate enrollment amid tightening visa policies, according to a new study released by NAFSA: Association of International Educators and other groups. 
    • U.S. colleges reported a 6% average drop in new international bachelor’s enrollment and a 19% drop in new international master’s enrollment for the fall. Of some 200 surveyed U.S. institutions, 48% saw declines in their international bachelor’s students, and 63% experienced a drop-off in international graduate enrollment. 
    • Canada suffered even more dramatic declines, while international student enrollment rose in Asian and European countries, according to the NAFSA study. Both U.S. and Canadian institutions primarily blamed restrictive government policies for the decline.

    Dive Insight:

    Since taking office, the Trump administration has launched a suite of aggressive policies that have made it difficult for many international students to study in the U.S. 

    Among other moves, dramatically slowed visa processing raised concerns this summer that tens of thousands of students might be stymied from coming to the U.S. for college. On top of that, the administration has revoked thousands of visas for international students already studying here and proposed a four-year cap on student visas, which could hit doctoral students particularly hard. 

    In the U.S., restrictive government policies were by far the No. 1 obstacle to international enrollment, with 85% of surveyed colleges citing them in the NAFSA study. That’s up from 58% of colleges that said the same in 2024. 

    “We are navigating one of the most dynamic moments in international education, driven in no small part by shifts in U.S. visa and immigration policy,” NAFSA Executive Director and CEO Fanta Aw said in a statement. “The ripple effects of these policy changes are being felt across campuses and communities around the world.”

    The distant No. 2 concern was tuition and living costs, with 47% of U.S. respondents citing them as an obstacle this year. 

    As international enrollment declines take a toll on college finances, 36% of colleges surveyed by NAFSA said they plan to expand into new markets to adapt. Another 28% are planning budget cuts, and 26% intend to expand online programming to gin up enrollment. 

    To be sure, the U.S. isn’t the only country where government restrictions weigh on foreign enrollment. In Canada — where new international bachelor’s and master’s enrollment fell by 36% and 35%, respectively — 90% of polled colleges listed restrictive policies as the top obstacle to enrollment. European colleges, excluding those in the U.K., also listed restrictions as the primary obstacle. 

    The survey was conducted in October and drew on responses from 461 institutions across 63 countries, including 201 U.S. colleges. 

    The NAFSA study adds to mounting evidence of international enrollment drop-offs this fall. A survey of more than 800 colleges found that their international enrollment declined overall by 1% in fall 2025, with their graduate student enrollment plummeting by 12%, per the annual Open Doors report from the Institute of International Education and the U.S. Department of State released earlier this month.

    New international enrollment fell even more overall — by 17% — this fall, according to the Open Doors survey.

    Source link

  • Adult Student Priorities Survey: Understanding Your Adult Learners 

    Adult Student Priorities Survey: Understanding Your Adult Learners 

    The Adult Student Priorities Survey (ASPS) is the instrument in the family of Satisfaction-Priorities Surveys that best captures the experiences of graduate level students and adult learners in undergraduate programs at four-year institutions. The Adult Student Priorities Survey provides the student perspectives for non-traditional populations along with external national benchmarks to inform decision-making for nearly 100 institutions across the country.

    Why the Adult Student Priorities Survey matters

    As a comprehensive survey instrument, the Adult Student Priorities Survey assesses student satisfaction within the context of the level of importance that students place on a variety of experiences, both inside and outside of the classroom. The combination of satisfaction and importance scores provides the identification of institutional strengths (areas of high importance and high satisfaction) and institutional challenges (areas of high importance and low satisfaction). Strengths can be celebrated, and challenges can be addressed by campus leadership to build on the good where possible and to re-enforce other areas where needed.

    With the survey implementation, all currently enrolled students (based on who the institution wants to include) can provide feedback on their experiences with instruction, advising, registration, recruitment/financial aid, support services and how they feel as a student at the institution. The results deliver external benchmarks with other institutions serving adult learners, including data that is specific to graduate programs, and the ability to monitor internal benchmarks when the survey is administered over multiple years. (The national student satisfaction results are published annually). The delivered results also provide the option to analyze subset data for all standard and customizable demographic indicators to understand where targeted initiatives may be required to best serve student populations.

    Connecting ASPS data to student success and retention

    Like the Student Satisfaction Inventory and the Priorities Survey for Online Learners (the other survey instruments in the Satisfaction-Priorities family), the data gathered by the Adult Student Priorities Survey can support multiple initiatives on campus including to inform student success efforts, to provide the student voice for strategic planning, to document priorities for accreditation purposes and to highlight positive messaging for recruitment activities. Student satisfaction has been positively linked with higher individual student retention and higher institutional graduation rates, getting right to the heart of higher education student success.

    Learn more about best practices for administering the online Adult Student Priorities Survey at your institution, which can be done any time during the academic year on the institutions’ timeline.

    Ask for a complimentary consultation with our student success experts

    What is your best approach to increasing student retention and completion? Our experts can help you identify roadblocks to student persistence and maximize student progression. Reach out to set up a time to talk.

    Request now

    Source link

  • FIRE SURVEY: Colleagues and faculty unions fail to defend scholars targeted for speech

    FIRE SURVEY: Colleagues and faculty unions fail to defend scholars targeted for speech

    “I was afraid to leave my home for several weeks. I was afraid for the safety of my children. I received death threats.”

    “I was vomiting throughout the day, couldn’t eat, was having constant panic attacks, couldn’t be around people or leave the house . . .”

    “I was getting violent threats via email every day . . . The police were doing daily drive-bys because so many people threatened me with violence.”

    PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 28, 2025 — These are just some of the harrowing first-person accounts collected by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression in “Sanctioned Scholars: The Price of Speaking Freely in Today’s Academy,” a new survey of scholars who have been targeted for any protected speech since the beginning of the decade.

    “Cancellation campaigns are often wrapped in the language of preventing ‘emotional harm,’” said FIRE’s Manager of Polling and Analytics Nathan Honeycutt. “But our survey shows that it’s the mobs themselves that inflict lasting mental anguish on academics, many of whom still suffer the consequences long after the controversy subsided.”

    FIRE reached out to the over 600 academics listed in its Scholars Under Fire database who were sanctioned or targeted between 2020 and 2024, of whom 209 completed our survey. (FIRE’s survey was conducted before the Sept. 10 assassination of Charlie Kirk, which was followed by nearly a hundred scholars being targeted, over a dozen fired, and 2025 emerging as a new record high.)

    Nearly all (94%) who participated in the survey described the impact of their experience as negative. Roughly two-thirds (65%) experienced emotional distress, and significant chunks reported facing harrowing social setbacks, such as being shunned at work (40%) or lost professional relationships (47%) and friendships (33%).

    For some, the consequences were severe. About a quarter of the scholars who completed the survey reported that they sought psychological counseling (27%), and 1 in 5 lost their jobs entirely (20%).

    Nearly all institutions of higher learning promise academic freedom and free speech rights to their scholars. But many of the targeted scholars reported that they received no support from precisely the institutions and individuals who were supposed to have their backs in moments of crisis and controversy. Only 21% reported that they received at least a moderate amount of  public support of their faculty union, for example, and a paltry 11% reported that they received public support from administrators.

    Tellingly, colleagues felt more comfortable supporting the targeted scholars privately rather than publicly. Just under half of scholars received at least a moderate amount of private support from colleagues (49%), but only about a third (34%) received their support publicly.

    Grouped column chart

    In their open-ended responses to FIRE’s survey, many scholars reported that this was their deepest wound: the public silence and abandonment by their peers. “My biggest disappointment was in the cowardice of other faculty who refused to do anything public on my behalf,” one professor wrote.

    “Free speech advocates have long argued that acts of censorship don’t just silence one person,” said Honeycutt. “They chill the speech of anyone who agrees with them, and even those who disagree but are too cowed to defend their right to speak. Our report shows that the academy urgently needs courageous faculty willing to stand up for their colleagues, even when doing so is difficult or unpopular.”

    FIRE’s report also found a noticeable partisan gap in the level of public support reported by scholars. Larger proportions of conservative than liberal faculty reported that they received support from the general public (55% vs. 37%). But far fewer than their liberal peers reported that they received public support from their faculty union (7% vs. 29%) or their university colleagues (19% vs. 40%).

    Grouped column chart

    “Support for academic freedom should never depend on the views being expressed, but our survey shows that’s exactly what’s happening,” said FIRE Research Advisor Sean Stevens. “If faculty unions and institutions of higher learning won’t stand by scholars in their moments of crisis, they can’t claim to stand for free speech and inquiry.”

    The Scholars Under Fire survey was fielded from Jan. 15 to April 15, 2025. A total of 635 scholars were invited to participate in this study, and 209 participated. The scholars recruited were individuals listed in FIRE’s Scholars Under Fire Database because they experienced a sanction or sanction attempt between 2020 and 2024. Participation in the survey was anonymous to encourage candid responses without fear of personal consequence, and to allow participants to speak more freely about their experiences.


    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought—the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE recognizes that colleges and universities play a vital role in preserving free thought within a free society. To this end, we place a special emphasis on defending the individual rights of students and faculty members on our nation’s campuses, including freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience.

    CONTACT:

    Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]

    Source link

  • Policy uncertainty emerges as top barrier to student mobility 

    Policy uncertainty emerges as top barrier to student mobility 

    While affordability remains the greatest obstacle for students, IDP Education’s new Emerging Futures survey has revealed the growing impact of sudden and unclear policy changes shaping students’ international study decisions.  

    “Students and families are prepared to make sacrifices to afford their international education dreams. They can adjust budgets, seek scholarships and rely on part-time work. But they cannot plan for uncertainty,” said IDP chief partnerships officer Simon Emmett.  

    “When the rules change, without warning or clarity, trust falls away. Students hesitate, delay, or choose to study elsewhere.” 

    Drawing on the views of nearly 8,000 international students from 134 countries between July and August 2025, the results highlighted the critical importance of study destinations communicating policy changes to sustain trust among students.  

    The US and UK were rated the lowest for providing clear guidance on visas and arrivals processes, while New Zealand was identified as the top communicator in this respect.  

    What’s more, the UK saw the steepest rise in students withdrawing from plans to study there, indicating recent policy changes including plans to shorten the Graduate Route and increase compliance metrics for universities are creating uncertainty among international students. 

    Of the students who said they were pivoting away from major study destinations, over half (51%) indicated tuition fees had become unaffordable and one in five said it was too difficult to obtain a visa.  

    In markets such as Malaysia, the Philippines and the UAE, students reported delaying or redirecting applications almost immediately after unclear announcements by major destinations, the report said. 

    Meanwhile Canada’s share of withdrawals was shown to have eased, indicating messaging is helping to rebuild stability, the authors suggested, though Canadian study permit issuance has fallen dramatically in 2025.

    Without that stability, even the most attractive destinations risk losing trust

    Simon Emmett, IDP

    Despite policy disruptions in Australia over recent years, the country remained the most popular first-choice destination globally, ranked highly for value for money, graduate employment opportunities and post-study work pathways.  

    At the same time, many respondents flagged sensitivities to recent visa and enrolment changes, highlighting the need for consistent and transparent messaging to maintain Australia’s competitiveness, according to IDP.  

    The US saw the largest decline in popularity, dropping to third place behind Australia and the UK. 

    NAFSA CEO Fanta Aw said the findings should serve as a “wake-up call” that policy uncertainty has real human and economic costs, emphasising the need for “clear and consistent” communication from institutions and policymakers.  

    “Students are paying close attention to how the US administration handles student visas and post-study experiential learning opportunities like Optional Practical Training,” said Aw. 

    Visa restrictions and policy hostility have rocked the US under Trump’s second presidency, with global visa appointments suspended for nearly a month this summer, as well as thousands of student visa revocations and travel restrictions on 12 nations.  

    Post-study work opportunities are increasingly fragile in the US with government plans to overhaul the H-1B skilled worker visa to favour better paid jobs and OPT coming under increased scrutiny from policymakers. 

    Emmett highlighted the knock-on effect of these policy shocks, with student journeys being disrupted “not by ambition, but by uncertainty”. 

    “Countries that provide predictability will win the confidence of students and their families. Without that stability, even the most attractive destinations risk losing trust,” he said. 

    Despite financial and political challenges, demand for global study remained strong, with half of all prospective students intending to apply within six months, and a further 29% within a year. 

    South Asia emerged as the main driver of intent, with more than 60% of students surveyed from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh preparing near-term applications, though this region was also the most sensitive to abrupt or confusing policy shifts.  

    Source link

  • Plenty of schools have no-zeroes policies. And most teachers hate it, a new survey finds

    Plenty of schools have no-zeroes policies. And most teachers hate it, a new survey finds

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    About one in four teachers say their schools don’t give students zeroes. And nearly all of them hate it.

    The collection of practices known as equitable grading, which includes not giving students zeroes, not taking off points for lateness, and letting students retake tests, has spread in the aftermath of the pandemic. But it wasn’t known how widespread the practices were.

    A new nationally representative survey released Wednesday finds equitable grading practices are fairly common, though nowhere near universal. More than half of K-12 teachers said their school or district used at least one equitable grading practice.

    The most common practice — and the one that drew the most heated opposition in the fall 2024 survey — is not giving students zeroes for missing assignments or failed tests. Just over a quarter of teachers said their school or district has a no-zeroes policy.

    Around 3 in 10 teachers said their school or district allowed students to retake tests without penalty, and a similar share said they did not deduct points when students turned in work late. About 1 in 10 teachers said they were not permitted to factor class participation or homework into students’ final grades.

    Only 6% of teachers said their school used four or more equitable grading practices.

    That was surprising to Adam Tyner, who co-authored the new report for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank, in partnership with the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research organization. He expected more schools would be following a “whole package” of grading reforms supported by advocates like former teacher and education consultant Joe Feldman, who wrote the influential book “Grading for Equity.”

    “It’s not like this has swept the country,” said Tyner, who has studied grading practices. He argues that some policies meant to create equity lead to grade inflation and don’t benefit students.

    The findings come as many schools are rethinking what students should have to do to get a high school diploma, and how much emphasis should be put on grades. At the same time, many schools continue to struggle with student disengagement and historically high rates of absenteeism following the pandemic. As a result, they’re trying to hold students accountable for their work without making it impossible to catch up on missed assignments.

    Though ideas about how to grade students more fairly predate the pandemic, several large districts started rethinking their grading practices following that disruption, as more students struggled to meet strict deadlines or do their homework.

    Proponents of equitable grading say it’s important for students to be able to show what they know over time, and that just a few zeroes averaged into a grade can make it difficult for students to ever catch up. When students don’t see a path to passing a class, it can make them less motivated or stop trying altogether.

    Still, some teachers have pushed back, arguing that no-zeroes policies can hurt student motivation, too.

    That showed up in the recent survey.

    Eight in 10 teachers said giving students partial credit for assignments they didn’t turn in was harmful to student engagement. Opposition to no-zeroes policies came from teachers of various racial backgrounds, experience levels, and who worked with different demographics of students.

    No-zeroes policies can take various forms but often mean that the lowest possible grade is a 50 on a 100-point scale. Some schools use software that will automatically convert lower grades to a 50, one teacher wrote on the survey.

    Schools that enrolled mostly students of color were more likely to have no-zeroes policies, the survey found. And middle schools were more likely than high schools and elementary schools to have no-zeroes policies, no-late-penalty policies, and retake policies.

    Researchers weren’t sure why those policies popped up more in middle schools.

    But Katherine Holden, a former middle school principal in Oregon’s Ashland School District who trains school districts on equitable grading practices, has some guesses.

    High schools may be more worried that changing their grading practices will make it harder for students to get into college, Holden said — a misconception in her eyes. And districts may see middle schoolers as especially likely to benefit from things like clear grading rubrics and multiple chances to show what they know, as they are still developing their organization and time-management skills.

    In the open-ended section of the survey, several teachers expressed concerns that no-zeroes policies were unfair and contributed to low student motivation.

    “Students are now doing below-average work or no work at all and are walking out with a C or B,” one teacher told researchers.

    “Most teachers can’t stand the ‘gifty fifty,’” said another.

    More than half of teachers said letting students turn in work late without any penalty was harmful to student engagement.

    “[The policy] removes the incentive for students to ever turn work in on time, and then it becomes difficult to pass back graded work because of cheating,” one teacher said.

    But teachers were more evenly divided on whether allowing students to retake tests was harmful or not.

    “Allowing retakes without penalty encourages a growth mindset, but it also promotes avoidance and procrastination,” one teacher said.

    Another said teachers end up grading almost every assignment more than once because students have no reason to give their best effort the first time.

    The report’s authors recommend getting rid of blanket policies in favor of letting individual teachers make those calls. Research has shown that other grading reforms, such as grading written assignments anonymously or using grading rubrics, can reduce bias.

    Still, teachers don’t agree on the best approach to grading. In the survey, 58% of teachers said it was more important to have clear schoolwide policies to ensure fair student grading — though the question didn’t indicate what that policy should look like — while the rest preferred using their professional judgment.

    “There are ways to combat bias, there are ways to make grading more fair, and we’re not against any of that,” Tyner said. “What we’re really concerned about is when we’re lowering standards, or lowering expectations. … Accountability is always a balancing act.”

    Nicole Paxton, the principal of Mountain Vista Community School, a K-8 school in Colorado’s Harrison School District 2, has seen that balancing act in action.

    Her district adopted a policy a few years ago that requires teachers to grade students on a 50-100 scale. Students get at least a 50% if they turn in work, but they get a “missing” grade if they don’t do the assignment. Middle and high schoolers are allowed to make up missing or incomplete assignments. But it has to be done within the same quarter, and teachers can deduct up to 10% for late assignments.

    Paxton thinks the policy was the right move for her district. She says she’s seen it motivate kids who are struggling to keep trying, when before they stopped doing their work because they didn’t think they could ever bounce back from a few zeroes.

    “As adults, in the real world, we get to show what we know and learn in our careers,” Paxton said. “And I think that kids are able to do that in our building, too.”

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    For more news on classroom trends, visit eSN’s Innovative Teaching hub.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link