Tag: Talent

  • Why Global Talent is Turning Away from U.S. Higher Education—and What We’re Losing – Edu Alliance Journal

    Why Global Talent is Turning Away from U.S. Higher Education—and What We’re Losing – Edu Alliance Journal

    In 2025, much of my professional focus has been on small colleges in the United States. But as many of you know, my colleague and Edu Alliance co-founder, Dr. Senthil Nathan, and I also consult extensively in the international higher education space. Senthil, based in Abu Dhabi, UAE—where Edu Alliance was founded was asked by a close friend of ours, Chet Haskell, about how the Middle East and its students are reacting to the recent moves by the Trump Administration. Dr. Nathan shared a troubling May 29th article from The National, a UAE English language paper titled, It’s not worth the risk”: Middle East students put US dreams on hold amid Trump visa crackdown.

    The article begins with this chilling line:

    “Young people in the Middle East have spoken of their fears after the US government decided to freeze overseas student interviews and plan to begin vetting their social media accounts. The directive signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and sent to diplomatic and consular posts halts interview appointments at US universities.”

    The UAE, home to nearly 10 million people—90% of whom are expatriates—is a global crossroads. Many of their children attend top-tier international high schools and are academically prepared to study anywhere in the world. Historically, the United States has been a top choice for both undergraduate and graduate education.

    But that is changing.

    This new wave of student hesitation, and in many cases fear, represents a broader global shift. Today, even the most qualified international students are asking whether the United States is still a safe, welcoming, or stable destination for higher education. And their concerns are justified.

    At a time when U.S. institutions are grappling with enrollment challenges—including a shrinking pool of domestic high school graduates—we are simultaneously sending signals that dissuade international students from coming. That’s not just bad policy. It’s bad economics.

    According to NAFSA: Association of International Educators, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the U.S. economy during the 2023–2024 academic year and supported 378,175 jobs across the country. These students fill key seats in STEM programs, support local economies, and enrich our campuses in ways that go far beyond tuition payments.

    And the stakes go beyond higher education.

    A 2024 study found that 101 companies in the S&P 500 are led by foreign-born CEOs. Many of these executives earned their degrees at U.S. universities, underscoring how American higher education is not just a national asset but a global talent incubator that fuels our economy and leadership.

    Here are just a few examples:

    • Jensen Huang: Born in Taiwan (NVIDIA) – B.S. from Oregon State, M.S. from Stanford
    • Elon Musk: Born in South Africa (Tesla, SpaceX) – B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania
    • Sundar Pichai: Born in India (Alphabet/Google) – M.S. from Stanford, MBA from Wharton
    • Mike Krieger: Born in Brazil (Co-founder of Instagram) B.S. and M.S. Symbolic Systems and Human-Computer Interaction, Stanford University
    • Satya Nadella: Born in India (Microsoft) – M.S. from the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, MBA from the University of Chicago
    • Max Levchin: Born in Ukraine (Co-founder of PayPal, Affirm), Bachelor’s in Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
    • Arvind Krishna: Born in India (IBM) – Ph.D. from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
    • Safra Catz: Born in Israel (Oracle) – Undergraduate & J.D. from University of Pennsylvania
    • Jane Fraser: Born in the United Kingdom (Citigroup) – MBA from Harvard Business School
    • Nikesh Arora: Born in India  (Palo Alto Networks) – MBA from Northeastern
    • Jan Koum: Born in Ukraine (Co-founder of WhatsApp), Studied Computer Science (did not complete degree) at San Jose State University

    These leaders represent just a fraction of the talent pipeline shaped by U.S. universities.

    According to a 2023 American Immigration Council report, 44.8% of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children, including iconic firms like Apple, Google, and Tesla. Together, these companies generate $8.1 trillion in annual revenue and employ over 14.8 million people globally.

    The Bottom Line

    The American higher education brand still carries immense prestige. But prestige alone won’t carry us forward. If we continue to restrict and politicize student visas, we will lose not only potential students but also future scientists, entrepreneurs, job creators, and community leaders.

    We must ask: Are our current policies serving national interests, or undermining them?

    Our classrooms, campuses, corporations, and communities are stronger when they include the world’s brightest minds. Let’s not close the door on a future we have long helped build.


    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on international partnerships and market evaluations.

    Source link

  • Banking on Human Capital: How RBC Sees the Future of Talent, Innovation, and the Role of Post-Secondary Institutions

    Banking on Human Capital: How RBC Sees the Future of Talent, Innovation, and the Role of Post-Secondary Institutions

    Canada’s heading into some pretty choppy waters in 2025. For a century or so, we’ve had a one track economic strategy, closer integration with the United States. Now, the Trump administration with its faith in tariffs as an instrument of both power and corruption, has essentially nuked that strategy, at least as far as the trading goods is concerned. There’s a lot of change coming to Canada, and it’ll be costly. In much the same way that diplomatic evolution and defense needs are forcing European countries to look at higher education in a different light, Canadian universities are looking around at their new situation very nervously too.

    In Canada right now, a few people are making the case for change as strongly as John Stackhouse. John’s the ex editor-in-chief of the Global Mail. He’s now a Senior Vice President at the Royal Bank of Canada, leading that organization’s economics and thought leadership group. He’s the lead author of a recent report called “A Smarter Path, the Case for Post-Secondary Reform.” This report makes a number of, shall we say, uncomfortable observations about the relationship between Canadian higher education and the Canadian knowledge economy, in particular, between high spending and high graduate numbers on the one hand, and low productivity and significant levels of graduate underemployment on the other.

    Though the report does not directly address the issue of Trump or tariffs — it was released 48 hours before Liberation Day — it has added to the sense in Canada that the higher education sector is headed for and indeed needs a shakeup. And just to come clean for a moment, we here at Higher Education Strategy Associates are in a partnership with John and RBC and the Business Higher Education Roundtable, putting together a series of events culminating in a policy summit on post-secondary education in late September of this year.

    In the interview today, I talked to John about what the Canadian system’s biggest challenges are, how universities and businesses can more effectively partner with one another, and why Canadian political parties are increasingly shy about betting on the knowledge economy. But enough for me. Let’s turn it over to John.


    The World of Higher Education Podcast
    Episode 3.30 | Banking on Human Capital: How RBC Sees the Future of Talent, Innovation, and the Role of Post-Secondary Institutions

    Transcript

    Alex Usher (AU): Okay, John, why does a bank care so much about post-secondary education?

    John Stackhouse (JS): That’s a fair question, Alex—and thank you for including us in the podcast. If I can put it in terms of capital, maybe that’s what people would expect from a bank. Our economy, and the society that depends on it, relies on different kinds of capital. We have natural capital, technology capital, and of course, financial capital—which you’d expect from a bank. But just as critical is human capital. That’s core to the economy.

    There’s nothing new in saying that, except to emphasize that from RBC’s perspective, when we look at Canada’s prospects through the 2030s and the prosperity we hope to achieve, we need to think seriously about how we harness all these forms of capital: natural, financial, technological—and critically—human capital.

    We need to develop a more prosperous economy and society, but also the kind of vibrant communities that companies want to be part of, and that we as individuals want to contribute to. As a bank, that matters to us. Our purpose is to help clients thrive and communities prosper—and both of those depend on human capital. We hear that from our clients, our community partners, and our employees. So those are just some of the reasons why RBC is leaning into the post-secondary conversation.

    AU: In the paper you co-wrote, you describe Canada’s post-secondary education system as being slow, costly, and often out of sync with the economy. I think those are fairly common criticisms of higher education around the world. Do you think there’s something specific to Canada in that critique? Or is this more of a general observation about modern higher ed?

    JS: There’s probably some parchment from a thousand years ago where an education critic wrote, “You’re too slow, too costly, and out of touch with the economy.” -Signed, the monks of higher education. But yes, it’s fair to say that Canada isn’t alone in facing these challenges. That said, there are a few things that may be more pronounced here. One is that we’ve been a bit of a victim of our own success. We have a lot of post-secondary education in this country, but we haven’t differentiated enough within the system.

    Continental Europe, for example, continues to differentiate in ways we haven’t. So we end up producing graduates with degrees and diplomas that are too similar—and not always aligned with specific needs.

    We also haven’t allowed the business model to evolve at the pace of the economy or society, or even the expectations of students and educators. Many of them know the world is moving faster than our institutions are.

    And then on the research side—which I’m sure we’ll get to—we really lag behind. As an advanced economy, a G7 country, we’re not where we should be in post-secondary research. Part of the issue lies with the private sector—we haven’t integrated research and business to the degree that an advanced economy will need to in the 2030s.

    AU: RBC has been a really strong voice on the education–work connection. What are employers still not getting from the current system? And what responsibility do you think they have in helping to improve it?

    JS: There’s definitely a shared responsibility—and thanks for mentioning RBC’s commitment to work-integrated learning. One of the reasons we’re so invested in this is because our CEO, Dave McKay, is a product of the co-op system at Waterloo. He has a deep belief that work-integrated learning not only improves the student experience, but also strengthens the education system itself.

    When students return to the classroom after applying their knowledge in the real world, it deepens their learning. And it also improves the organizations they work with. At RBC, we hire a couple thousand co-op students every year—not just programmers from Waterloo, but fantastic interns from TMU and a wide range of colleges and universities across the country.

    We benefit from that. It improves how we work. Yes, it creates a talent pipeline—but we’ve also seen something more transformative. Over the past decade, we’ve started giving our co-op students real challenges to solve. We form teams, provide some management support, and tell them: here are some of our biggest problems—see you in August. Then they present their ideas to senior leadership in what’s essentially a competitive showcase. We’ve had around a hundred patents come out of that system.

    Students bring critical thinking, fresh perspectives, and a collaborative mindset that they develop in post-secondary. They often arrive with stronger teamwork skills than we could teach them from scratch, and they’re able to apply those skills to real problems.

    So what do employers need to do? They need to treat this as a serious investment in their own businesses. It’s a way to drive change, but it requires resources. You have to hire people who are good at managing these programs. Students don’t just walk in and figure it out on their own—it’s not Lord of the Flies. It takes organizational effort.

    AU: Let’s talk about what educational institutions are doing. I got the impression from the report that you think they still need to do more to align educational outputs with labor market needs. That said, there’s been a lot of progress over the last decade: growth in work-integrated learning, the rise of microcredentials, experiments with competency-based learning. But it sounds like you don’t think that’s enough. What more needs to happen?

    JS: Sadly—or depending on your perspective, maybe excitingly—none of us are doing enough. That’s partly because of technology, but also because of broader global forces. The world around us is changing faster than most of us are able to keep up with—including large organizations, small businesses, and educational institutions.

    The pace of change is accelerating, and it will only continue to do so. Institutions need to become much more change-minded in how they operate. That’s hard in education, for all the reasons your listeners will understand.

    One major challenge is the business model. It’s becoming a crisis. Post-secondary institutions aren’t getting the funding they need. Everyone knows that—but they’re losing the argument in the public square when it comes to making the case for new funding. And given the pressures society is under, I don’t see that changing in a meaningful way anytime soon.

    So institutions need more freedom to change—to evolve their business models, including how they generate revenue. And that means becoming more connected to, and responsive to, the broader economy around them. That’s where many of the new opportunities lie.

    AU: John, we’ve been talking mostly about human capital, which you’ve said is a key concern for RBC. But what about research and the co-production of knowledge? What are the respective roles of post-secondary institutions and businesses? Why don’t we see the kind of close connection between enterprises and universities that exists in parts of Europe or the U.S.? What’s the missing link?

    JS: That’s a tough nut to crack—and one that people far smarter than me have studied and debated for decades. But part of the challenge lies in the private sector itself. In many ways, we’ve become too much of a “branch plant” and “hinterland” economy—living off the wealth of the land, our access to the U.S. market, and the dividends of an innovation economy.

    I wouldn’t say that’s coming to an end—because that would be overly dramatic—but we’re clearly experiencing a sharp shift. In an odd way, the Trump challenge to Canada is a bit of a gift. It’s forcing us to acknowledge that we can’t be so dependent on the U.S. market. That’s become a broadly shared Canadian view. We need to build stronger connections with other parts of the world—and that’s going to require more serious investment in R&D from our businesses.

    If we want to transform branch plants into independent, globally competitive facilities, especially ones that can succeed in European and Asian markets—despite the distance—we need to invest in research and development in a way we haven’t for a generation.

    New governments—federal and provincial—need to act with urgency. They should bring business leaders together and ask, “What do we need to build?” And not just through one-off tax incentives. We need to foster a culture of collaboration and dynamism between universities, colleges, polytechnics, and businesses to shape what I’d call a post-Trump Canadian economy.

    That’s not going to happen by copying Germany’s Fraunhofer model or Japan’s approach—those are deeply rooted in specific cultural contexts. We need to develop something uniquely Canadian.

    And we can’t afford to spend years on a Royal Commission or slow-moving studies. This needs to happen quickly. A new federal government could seize this moment to bring together the provinces and private sector with a sense of urgency—and maybe even a crisis mindset.

    AU: I’ll come back to the Trump issue in a moment, but going back to the report—you lay out a number of challenges in the sector: outdated budget models, over-credentialed but under-skilled graduates, and so on. What do you think is the most pressing reform Canadian post-secondary needs right now? What’s the weakest link in the system?

    JS: That’s a great question—and a hard one to answer. But I’d go back to the funding model. Post-secondary institutions need more flexibility to innovate with how they’re funded. They need to move beyond the constraints of provincial funding and develop new approaches to tuition and fees—ones that are more closely tied to performance, outputs, and outcomes.

    There also needs to be more competition within the sector. Most people I know in post-secondary are pretty enthusiastic about that idea—though, understandably, they’d like the model to be structured so they have a good shot at succeeding.

    I think provinces need to be nudged—and maybe not even that much—to open the door to more innovation, more competition, and a bit more daring on the institutional side.

    AU: I think the words you used in the report were “reasonable deregulation.” Tell me more about increased competition—are there things we could do to incentivize more new players in the system who might be more disruptive?

    JS: There’s nothing quite like new players. I’ve studied enough sectors over the years to see that when it comes to innovation, nothing works quite as well as a vibrant, well-funded new entrant. Encouraging that kind of disruption would move us forward significantly—and it would give creative people across the sector permission to come up with ideas they’re not even thinking about yet. That’s the power of competition.

    So one key step is reducing the regulatory barriers that prevent those new players from entering the space.

    I also think employers can play a bigger role by sending clearer market signals. That could be as simple as hiring differently. We tend to recruit from the same institutions over and over—often for good reasons—but “like hires like.” If we want to encourage new entrants, we have to show that their graduates will have good job prospects. That kind of signal travels fast—even down to the high school level, where students are making decisions about their future.

    AU: Outside the scope of the report, you’ve been very outspoken in recent months about the gravity of the threat Canada faces from the U.S. under Trump. You spoke at the Business + Higher Education Roundtable event, and I know people who heard your remarks were quite sobered by them.

    There are clearly big changes coming to the country as a whole. What are the implications for universities? What changes do you think are now baked into the systems of government subsidy and regulation because of the shifting geopolitical situation?

    JS: It’s unfortunate that colleges and universities aren’t more central to the Trump-related conversation. We’re hearing a lot about pipelines, export infrastructure, and ports—which are all important. We’re also hearing a lot about trade-exposed sectors: autos, steel, aluminum, even pharmaceuticals. Guess what? All of those sectors depend on post-secondary institutions.

    So how are we thinking about the steel plant of the future that might be exporting more to Europe or Asia? It’s going to need incentives to retool. The same goes for auto plants that may need to shift into different kinds of manufacturing—including, potentially, defense production as we scale up defense spending. What kind of talent will be needed for that? How are schools in those regions adapting? And to your point about research—how can we better integrate the research side of those institutions into this transformation?

    They’ll need to develop new models—and we need to incentivize that shift. The good news is, I think there will be more money on the table. But it will be different kinds of research and institutional funding than what we’ve seen in the past. And that could be a good thing.

    So how do colleges and universities rise to that challenge? There could be tens of billions of dollars available to support economic transition. They’ll need to step up and play a leading role—and if they do, they’ll be rewarded for it.

    Interestingly, there’s already growing enthusiasm to attract academic talent from the U.S.—what some are calling “Trump intellectual refugees.”

    I’ve seen similar cycles before. After 9/11, during the Bush years, there was a similar kind of excitement. Star academics moved here as a sort of cultural vote for Canada. But that kind of movement doesn’t tend to be sustainable—or even all that interesting—from a long-term perspective.

    So how do we make it sustainable and interesting? One idea, from someone else, is to create a kind of Canada Research Chairs 2.0 for the late 2020s.

    Not a play to say “Come escape Trump,” but rather to say: if you’re an entrepreneurial, ambitious academic working in areas that matter to Canada, there’s no better place in the world to be right now than here.

    AU: One of the points you touched on earlier is that political parties seem to be responding to aggressive tariffs on exports by doubling down on producing goods. I find that kind of strange—surely one of the answers is to pivot more toward services. We’re not especially strong in that area, and in theory, that’s where universities should have an advantage. Why do you think we’re pushing so hard on goods while letting the services side drift?

    JS: That’s a great observation. We’ve become more of a services—or maybe better put, an intangibles—economy. A knowledge economy. That was a popular thing to say a decade ago, though it’s become a bit derided since.

    But we need both. You can have intangibles on their own, but the best ones tend to emerge from tangible activities.

    We need to play to our strengths, and that includes our resource economy. One of the things we noted in our study is that post-secondary doesn’t align with the resource economy as well as it should. That doesn’t mean just producing miners and rig operators—though those roles will still matter for years to come. There’s a whole spectrum of science and discovery we’ve long excelled at, and we need to scale that up if we want to lead in critical minerals, for example.

    It’s not just about having critical mineral mines or processing plants. We’ve shut down many of our best mining schools in this country, while China has established far more than we have—far more than you’d expect based on population size alone.

    So yes, we need to invest in the intangible—knowledge—side of that tangible sector. It’s not just manufacturing, as you said. It’s also processing and resource extraction, which are highly sophisticated fields. Those have earned Canada substantial academic recognition over the decades.

    We need to ensure that the intangible capacity we’re building in our universities and colleges remains closely tied to the real economy—especially to manufacturing and resource development.

    AU: Best case scenario—ten years from now—what does the Canadian post-secondary system look like? How is it different from today?

    JS: It would have much more variation. In fact, we might see something entirely new emerge—something that’s not quite a college, university, or polytechnic, but a distinct Canadian model.

    Just as Canada pioneered community colleges in the 1950s and ’60s, we have a chance to create a new tier. And this wouldn’t be at the expense of the existing systems—but something more suited to evolving needs.

    We’d have institutions that reflect and respond to the economy across all regions, including the far North. We don’t need to be physically present everywhere—we can do a lot of this remotely—but we do need our institutions to better reflect the realities of the country and the economy. And they need to be more connected to the world.

    You and I have talked a lot about the situation with international students. The real tragedy of what’s happened over the last decade would be if we abandoned the whole model. We had something that was largely good—it got mucked up—but that doesn’t mean we throw it out.

    We need to fix what went wrong. And we need to remain a destination for the best and most ambitious students from around the world. Ideally, we want them to stay—but even if they go back home, they can help connect us to the world.

    Because if we’re being honest with ourselves, what we’re really saying as Canadians—though maybe not quite this explicitly—is that we want to be a more global country. And our post-secondary system is one of the best tools we have to make that happen. But it will take a deliberate effort to reach out to the world—and there’s no sector better positioned to do that than post-secondary.

    AU: John, thanks so much for being with us today.

    JS: Thanks, Alex. I’ve really enjoyed it.

    Alex Usher: And it just remains for me to thank our excellent producers, Tiffany MacLennan, Sam Pufek, and you, our viewers, listeners, and readers for following us. If you have any questions or concerns about today’s episode or suggestions for future ones, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with us at podcast@higheredstrategy.com. Run, don’t walk to our YouTube page and hit subscribe. That way you’ll never miss an episode of the World of Higher Education Podcast.

    Join us next week when our guest will be Rómulo Pinheiro. He’s a professor at the University of Agder in Norway, and we’ll be talking about university’s role in the economic development strategies of rural and remote regions. Bye for now.

    *This podcast transcript was generated using an AI transcription service with limited editing. Please forgive any errors made through this service. Please note, the views and opinions expressed in each episode are those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect those of the podcast host and team, or our sponsors.

    This episode is sponsored by KnowMeQ. ArchieCPL is the first AI-enabled tool that massively streamlines credit for prior learning evaluation. Toronto based KnowMeQ makes ethical AI tools that boost and bottom line, achieving new efficiencies in higher ed and workforce upskilling. 

    Source link

  • Can We Teach Talent? How Mindsets Can Foster Entrepreneurial Success – Faculty Focus

    Can We Teach Talent? How Mindsets Can Foster Entrepreneurial Success – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Can We Teach Talent? How Mindsets Can Foster Entrepreneurial Success – Faculty Focus

    Can We Teach Talent? How Mindsets Can Foster Entrepreneurial Success – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Talent pipeline for local businesses supports college students

    Talent pipeline for local businesses supports college students

    About four in 10 college students believe developing specific skills needed for their career is among the most important outcomes to them in their academic experience, according to a winter 2023 Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and College Pulse. However, 22 percent of all respondents indicated they had never participated in experiential learning or an internship.

    Champlain College in Vermont partnered with a local coworking campus and business incubator, Hula, in 2023 to build a talent pipeline for local businesses and expose students to new and maybe unfamiliar career opportunities.

    Over the past two years, the partnership has resulted in real-life case studies and client-facing work for students and faculty, as well as greater engagement with young talent for employers.

    What’s the need: “One thing that’s very apparent in Vermont is we need young talent,” says Angelika Koukoulas, Champlain’s Innovation Hub Project Manager, who oversees the Hula-Champlain partnership.

    Vermont experiences the worst brain drain in the country, losing 57.5 percent of its college graduates, many of whom move to Massachusetts or New York, according to 2022 data analysis.

    Koukoulas’s role is to help students identify work experiences in Vermont and build relationships with employers to fill holes in their workforces.

    “They need more hands, they need big ideas, they need students who are excited about their work and are willing to put in effort to learn,” Koukoulas says.

    There’s also a national shortage of internship opportunities, one that is tied to a mismatch in employer needs and student interests. The partnership addresses both comprehensively by weighing all stakeholders’ interests.

    How it works: Hula is about a mile away from Champlain College and just down the road from the college’s Miller Center campus.

    The coworking space supports 60 member businesses and up to 600 coworking individuals. The businesses belong to a variety of industries, including green technology and marketing, as well as traditional business or finance roles.

    A majority of the collaborations fall into two camps: companies providing projects for capstone-like courses for experiential learning or companies creating internships for students.

    Inquiries can come directly from faculty members looking to revamp curriculum or offer real-world scenarios for students to engage their skills or from employers who have a specific need and want young talent to assist them. Often, start-ups are looking for student support for social media or blog-writing campaigns, but there’s also a need for general business admin or accounting support, Koukoulas says.

    For internships, Koukoulas will serve as a recruiter of sorts for the company partner, assisting them in creating the job description and posting it on Handshake and also encouraging students she believes would be a good fit to apply and increasing the number of applicants for the business partner.

    “It widens their candidate pool and hopefully gets more students opportunities that they wouldn’t have even thought of otherwise,” Koukoulas says.

    All projects have been pro-bono, so the company invests zero dollars to enlist a class for work, but almost all internships have been paid roles.

    What’s different: Hula serves both as a business partner, hiring interns and supporting class projects, but also as an incubator for small businesses in Vermont.

    The people who work on Hula’s campus rotate, meaning there’s continual variety of the types of industries or groups students could partner with. The climate of the office building also means businesses are innovation and creatively minded, making partnership more natural.

    Koukoulas has an office at Hula, meaning she can directly engage in communal spaces or in building channels to solicit employer partnerships.

    Vermont also has a very relational culture, something Koukoulas has had to navigate as a more recent resident to the Green Mountain State, whether the relationships are with faculty—who have taught a course for a long time and may be hesitant to make changes—or with businesses leaders, who consider their start-up to be their baby and may be uncomfortable letting a student participate in their work.

    There’s an educational piece to the puzzle, both helping faculty identify their ask for project and employers create meaningful internships for learners. Koukoulas hosted an Internship 101 workshop for Hula businesses to set expectations for internships and provide guidance on best practices, such as providing students a mentor. She also hosts regular lunch for interns who work within the Hula offices to check in and provide support as needed.

    The impact: Since the partnership launched in summer 2023, 90 students have engaged in a Hula-based project within a course, and 18 students have participated in an internship.

    The partnership is in its early stages, so Champlain doesn’t have data on how students have translated their work with the start-ups into longer-term career development, but exposure to new careers and experiential learning are two benefits Koukoulas is eager to see manifest.

    “I can’t wait to see if it works; I can’t wait to see the fruit of that labor in the next couple of years,” Koukoulas says.

    If your student success program has a unique feature or twist, we’d like to know about it. Click here to submit.

    Source link

  • White House Announces Actions to Attract STEM Talent – CUPA-HR

    White House Announces Actions to Attract STEM Talent – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | February 7, 2022

    On January 21, President Biden announced several agency programs at the Department of State (DOS) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to help international STEM students and researchers access certain non-immigrant visas to allow them to study and work in the United States. The programs aim to admit and retain more international scholars to help advance STEM competitiveness in the U.S.

    Department of State

    The first announced program was DOS’s Early Career STEM Research Initiative. The initiative will facilitate engagement between J-1 visa recipients coming to the U.S. to participate in STEM research with host organizations, including businesses. Additionally, the department also announced new guidance to allow J-1 visa recipients in STEM fields to obtain up to 36 months of optional practical training. According to the announcement, the guidance will be applicable for exchange students in the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 academic years, so long as the students meet certain academic training requirements.

    Department of Homeland Security

    Of significance, the president’s announcement also included a decision by DHS to add 22 new fields of study in the STEM Optional Practical Training (OPT) program through the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). The program permits F-1 students earning bachelors, masters and doctorate degrees in certain STEM fields to remain in the United States for up to 36 months to complete OPT after earning their degrees. DHS issued a notice in the Federal Register announcing the specific fields of study added to the designated list of STEM fields.

    Additionally, the United States Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued guidance “to clarify how USCIS evaluates evidence to determine eligibility for O-1A non-immigrants of extraordinary ability, with a focus on persons in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) fields, as well as how USCIS determines whether an O-1 beneficiary’s prospective work is within the beneficiary’s area of extraordinary ability or achievement.”

    CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of any further updates to these programs and any additional policies and guidance documents impacting student visas as released by President Biden and Congress.



    Source link

  • Tips to Help HR Retain and Engage Talent – CUPA-HR

    Tips to Help HR Retain and Engage Talent – CUPA-HR

    by Jill Thompson | January 26, 2022

    In a recent members-only article from the winter issue of Higher Ed HR Magazine, Britni Elder, associate vice president for human resources and risk management at the University of Central Arkansas, shared tips and resources higher ed HR practitioners can tap into to get ahead of the resignation curve and not only hold onto employees, but keep them engaged and moving up within the institution.

    • Address employee discontentment at the manager level — Managers with poor people skills can lead to unhappy employees, and ultimately, more turnover within the institution. HR must ensure managers are equipped to manage their teams well and to help each team member reach their potential. This is a great opportunity for HR to partner with upper-level management to teach new managers the skills that will help them be the best leaders for their teams, not just managers.
    • Educate employees about total compensation — Oftentimes, employees leave for a bigger paycheck only to find that the base pay is better, but the benefits at the new job don’t compete with those of their previous job. When HR informs employees about total compensation (the tangible and intangible benefits offered by the employer), it enriches the employee decision-making process. They have the tools to really see when better pay is better pay, not just better base pay.
    • Prioritize well-being check-ins — Sometimes, employees are unhappy, and one way they think they can fix it is to change jobs. Unfortunately, the urge to change jobs may be only a deflection of deeper issues. HR can help in this area by keeping mental health resources and access to counseling opportunities in front of employees. Encourage managers to make time for intentional check-ins with direct reports.
    • Build a path for employees to reach their full potential — Focusing on what’s next for employees can open their eyes to the opportunities right in front of them rather than searching for something else outside the institution. HR should initiate conversations and ask employees about their career goals and construct a path to help them get there. Sometimes all it takes is a conversation to get things moving.

    Read the full members-only article: Four Areas HR Can Address to Boost Engagement and Retention.

    Resources for employee engagement and retention: 

    Employee Engagement Toolkit

    Stay Interviews Toolkit

    Compensation Programs/Plans Toolkit



    Source link