Tag: Trump

  • 11 numbers that capture the Trump effect on education

    11 numbers that capture the Trump effect on education

    by Sarah Butrymowicz, The Hechinger Report
    December 18, 2025

    About 1.5 million people teach on college campuses in the United States, and nearly 4 million teachers work in its public elementary and secondary schools. More than 15 million undergraduates attend U.S. colleges and universities. There are more than 50 million school-age children across the country.   

    They all have one thing in common: Federal education policy affects their lives. 

    President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon say they want to close the Department of Education and return control of education to the states. At the same time, however, they have aggressively, and rapidly, wielded federal power over schools. 

    Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education. 

    Here’s a look at some key data points from the first year of Trump’s second term that represent the outsized effect this presidency has had on the nation’s educational institutions and the people within them.

    — 15 —

    Number of executive orders Trump signed that exclusively address colleges or schools 

    In 2017, the first year of his first term, Trump signed two executive orders related to education. This year, he signed three times that number on just a single day in April.

    Among his most notable executive orders was one early in his term requiring the Department of Education to begin dismantling itself. He also established an Artificial Intelligence Education Task Force and asked cabinet members to provide him with a plan to end “radical indoctrination” in schools. Other executive orders have addressed school discipline, transgender athletes, registered apprenticeships and foreign influence on college campuses. 

    Another set of executive orders indirectly affected schools. For instance, the Department of Education interpreted an order about undocumented immigrants to require limiting access to some adult and career and technical education programs. And separately, in a presidential memorandum, Trump ordered universities to begin reporting the race of their applicants and admitted students, not just those who enroll in the fall. 

    — 26 —

    Number of investigations into K-12 transgender policies announced by the Education Department

    At the K-12 level, the administration has given no issue more attention than policies that govern which bathrooms, locker rooms and sports teams transgender students can access. In all, the department has announced at least 26 such investigations, including into six state education agencies and three statewide athletic associations. 

    By comparison, the Trump administration announced eight investigations into antisemitism at elementary and secondary schools and four cases of alleged racial discrimination that hurts white teachers or students. 

    In higher education, it’s the inverse: Just five investigations into transgender issues have been announced, while dozens of cases of antisemitism and racial discrimination are being investigated. 

    — 50+ —

    Number of education-specific lawsuits filed against the Trump administration

    It’s not unusual for presidential administrations to be sued: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton brags about suing the Biden administration 100 times. But the first year of Trump’s second term has been marked by unprecedented legal activity related to his administration’s education actions, according to a review of court documents and other lawsuit trackers. Trump, McMahon and the Department of Education have been sued over efforts to fire employees and dismantle the department, freeze funding and cancel grants, and end diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.

    The administration’s track record defending itself in court has been mixed, but it scored a major victory when the Supreme Court allowed its March layoffs of hundreds of Education Department staffers. However, courts have blocked some efforts to ban diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, forced the federal government to pay out some once-frozen grants and allowed Harvard to continue enrolling foreign students. 

    — 1,950 —

    Number of employees who left the Department of Education in the spring

    When Trump took office, the Education Department had more than 4,100 employees. Soon after, those numbers started dropping. In the first seven weeks of the new administration, 572 staffers voluntarily resigned. In March, 1,378 more employees were let go. Many offices were decimated without a clear plan for how or if their work would continue. 

    The National Center for Education Statistics, for example, went from about 100 staffers to three. That office is responsible for collecting data on the nation’s schools and colleges and administering the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Or take the Office for Civil Rights, which is in charge of investigating complaints about civil rights violations, including sexual harassment, racial discrimination and failure to provide an adequate education to students with disabilities. Seven of its 11 regional offices were shuttered and, in all, it lost nearly half its staff. (In December, some of those staffers were temporarily called back to help reduce a backlog of cases.) 

    The administration notified another 466 employees they were being let go during the government shutdown in October. Those positions were reinstated, however, as part of a congressional deal to reopen the government. The department also launched a plan to move large swathes of its work to other agencies, including the departments of Labor, State and Health and Human Services. 

    The Education Department did not respond to several requests for information about how many people are working at the agency now.

    — 5 — 

    Number of regional Head Start offices closed

    As part of the administration’s sweeping reductions in force, five out of 10 regional Head Start offices were abruptly closed and all employees fired in April. The offices, all in blue states, help oversee the free child care services provided by local early education programs for low-income children. In all, the five offices had been responsible for oversight of 318,000 — or 44 percent — of Head Start slots. 

    That wasn’t the only upheaval Head Start programs faced this year. At the end of January, the Trump administration directed agencies to temporarily freeze federal funding for thousands of financial assistance programs, including Head Start. Soon after, the White House said the program was exempt, and later it withdrew the order altogether. (A federal judge eventually ruled the entire directive was illegal.) But dozens of centers serving more than 20,000 children reported weeks-long delays in accessing federal money, with some forced to close temporarily. Then, during the government shutdown in the fall, centers serving 9,000 kids had to close their doors, some for several weeks, according to tracking by the First Five Years Fund.

    — 17% — 

    Decline in new international student enrollment in fall 2025

    The Trump administration’s attacks on foreign students with political views it disliked made international headlines this spring, as it targeted students protesting the Israel-Hamas war for deportation and announced plans to scour the social media accounts of new visa applicants. It also imposed travel restrictions and delayed some processing of student visas. The result is a slower pipeline of new foreign students coming to the United States, according to data from the Institute of International Education.

    The decrease in new international students was driven by graduate students, whose enrollment declined most sharply. But because most returning students stuck with their U.S. education plans, the overall number of foreign students (including those engaged in jobs related to future or past higher education enrollment) ticked down just 1 percent. Still, that’s a big deal for colleges and universities: Graduate students make up the lionʼs share of international enrollment and are a major source of revenue for many colleges. International students typically do not get financial aid, paying full price to attend. 

    — $1,700 —

    Maximum tax break an individual can get for donating to school choice scholarships

    Trump’s signature legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, was a major win for school choice advocates: It created a new federal school voucher program. The law sets up tax credit scholarships — vouchers — families can use to pay for private school tuition, tutoring or other educational expenses. Parents will also be able to use the money to cover homeschooling costs. Starting in 2027, individuals can get a tax credit of up to $1,700 for donations to nonprofits that provide the scholarships. Those nonprofits, in turn, will be in charge of handing out the money. 

    States must opt in if they want schools within their respective borders to be able to participate. At least three states so far have said they will decline, but more than 20 others have already established their own tax credit scholarship programs and are expected to sign up when the federal option becomes available. 

    — 6,353 —

    Number of complaints the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights dismissed between mid-March and mid-September

    In one six-month stretch, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights dismissed more than 6,000 complaints without an investigation, according to a September court filing. By contrast, the Biden administration did the same with 2,527 cases in its final three months. 

    The Trump administration has said in court filings it is following longstanding policies for dismissing cases. Former employees and advocates counter that the jump in dismissals suggests student and parent complaints are not being adequately probed, and that layoffs are affecting an agency that has long struggled to keep up with its caseload. 

    The rate at which the Trump administration reaches a final resolution in the cases it does investigate has significantly slowed. Between mid-March and mid-September, OCR resolved 581 complaints through mediated settlements, voluntary agreements or technical assistance. Another 138 were resolved after an investigation did not find evidence of violations. Those numbers are roughly the same as the last three months of the Biden administration (595 and 119 respectively).

    — $153 million —

    Amount of grant money the administration is spending to promote civics education 

    The Education Department said in September it gave more than $153 million to 85 grantees to work on civics education. That’s a major increase: Since this grant program launched in 2017, just 38 grants worth about $75 million had been awarded in all. 

    Promoting patriotic education is one of McMahon’s goals. “Patriotic education presents American history in a way that is accurate, honest, and inspiring,” her agency said in a September announcement prioritizing discretionary spending on this issue. “It emphasizes a unifying and uplifting portrayal of the nation’s founding ideals.” 

    McMahon also started the America 250 Civics Education Coalition, in preparation for next year’s anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The coalition is made up largely of conservative organizations including Turning Point USA, Moms for Liberty, Hillsdale College and Priests for Life. 

    — $5.8 billion —

    Minimum amount of federal research funding cut or frozen

    Federal research dollars, many of which flow to colleges and universities, were cut way back this year. It’s difficult to calculate exactly how much was lost; this money comes from many agencies and some remains mired in legal battles. The website Grant Witness, run by a group of researchers, tracks canceled or frozen grants. Its data shows that more than $5.1 billion in National Institutes of Health money that had yet to be spent was earmarked for colleges or universities, as was nearly $700 million from the National Science Foundation. (Some of that funding may have been restored.)

    Those agencies were two of the largest sources of federal grants to higher education, but not the only ones. More than $425 million in National Endowment for the Humanities grants, many of which are awarded to colleges, were canceled. (Those cuts were later found to be unlawful.) The Department of Agriculture canceled tens of millions of dollars in higher education research funding, and the Environmental Protection Agency also terminated such grants. 

    The picture doesn’t look better for year two of Trump’s term: The White House has proposed cutting all federal research funding by a third — a decrease of more than $33 billion from 2025. 

    — 0 —

    Number of colleges that have signed the Trump ‘Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education’

    The Trump administration has been aggressive in trying to bend higher education to its will. In October, officials reached out to nine universities, including some of the country’s most selective institutions, with a deal. The schools could be first in line for federal money if they agreed to a litany of demands including: 

    • Publishing standardized test scores for admitted students by race, sex and ethnicity
    • Capping foreign student enrollment at 15 percent
    • Prohibiting transgender females from using women’s locker rooms and bathrooms 
    • Freezing tuition for five years

    So far, none have accepted the offer, with seven universities rejecting it outright. The University of Texas at Austin and Vanderbilt University did not publicly rebuke the compact, but did not sign it. New College of Florida, which was not one of the nine, said it would sign if given the chance. Other universities signed separate agreements with the administration to unfreeze federal money. Columbia University, for example, paid $221 million and accepted a host of conditions to regain access to billions of federal dollars. 

    Contact investigations editor Sarah Butrymowicz at [email protected] or on Signal: @sbutry.04.

    This story about Trump’s effect on education was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.  

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/11-numbers-that-capture-the-trump-effect-on-education/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

    <img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=113911&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/11-numbers-that-capture-the-trump-effect-on-education/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • Trump expands travel bans and restrictions to 39 countries

    Trump expands travel bans and restrictions to 39 countries

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

    Dive Brief:

    • President Donald Trump on Tuesday fully banned individuals from an additional seven countries from traveling to the U.S., as well as those with travel documentation from Palestinian authorities, effective Jan. 1.
    • In a presidential proclamation, he also placed partial entry limitations on 15 additional countries, including Nigeria, one of the top 10 sources for international students in the U.S.
    • Higher education officials pushed back on the travel ban expansion — which will include 39 countries — arguing it will further constrict the U.S.’s international student pipeline and stymie the country’s global competitiveness.

    Dive Insight:

    Both partial and full federal travel restrictions block F and J visas, the types mostly frequently used by international students. F visas are more commonly known as international student visas. And certain foreign students can obtain J visas, which also cover short-term college instructors and researchers.

    In June, Trump issued a presidential proclamation that banned or restricted entry into the U.S. from 19 countries, a move which sparked several lawsuits. Tuesday’s proclamation more than doubled the number of affected countries.

    NAFSA: Association of International Educators called the expansion “anticipated” but “disappointing and misguided” in a Tuesday statement.

    “At a time when countries including China, Canada, Germany, and Japan are actively courting talented students, scholars, and researchers from around the world, this travel ban sends the message that the United States is better off without their contributions,” the group said. “The administration’s latest actions will undoubtedly prevent some of the world’s best and brightest students from contributing to U.S. predominance in research, science, and innovation.”

    Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, called the travel ban “a self-inflicted wound that directly undermines our economic competitiveness and our ability to welcome and retain global talent.” 

    “It signals to the world that the U.S. is no longer a welcoming destination for talent from around the world,” she said in a Wednesday statement.

    The proclamation exempts lawful permanent residents, current visa holders, and “individuals whose entry serves U.S. national interests” from the restrictions. It also exempts certain visa categories for athletes and diplomats.

    It did not list exceptions for international students, arguing that individuals overstaying their F and J visas, among other types, necessitate travel bans against some countries.

    High visa-overstay rates among individuals from these countries “demonstrate disregard for U.S. immigration laws and burden American enforcement resources,” the proclamation said.

    For example, Trump cited visa overstays in part when placing partial travel restrictions on Nigeria.

    In his proclamation, Trump alleged that more than 1 in 10 Nigerian citizens in the U.S. on a F, J or M visa overstay their visa, citing an annual report from U.S. Customs and Border Protection. An M visa allows foreign students to study at a vocational or approved nonacademic institution.

    But NAFSA said that data is “known to be deeply flawed.” Feldblum similarly called it “highly flawed and selective.” Both cited a June report from the National Foundation for American Policy, which conducts public policy research.

    Researchers at the nonprofit found that Trump’s June travel ban “significantly overstates the number of overstays from individual countries” in part by counting people who already left the country and people who changed status inside the U.S.

    “The overstay report allowed for a veneer of data to justify predetermined policy decisions,” the foundation report said. It added that the U.S. Department of State could address overstays by denying individual applications from people they suspect will overstay — “a less draconian approach than banning everyone in that country from entering the United States.”

    Nigeria first became a top 10 country for international students in 2020-21 and has held that status since. In 2024-25, almost 22,000 Nigerian students studied in the U.S.

    The number of foreign students from Nigeria studying in the U.S. has risen steadily for at least a decade and a half, except for a small dip during the height of the pandemic, according to Open Doors data.

    Countries facing travel restrictions as of Jan. 1 2026

    *extended from June travel ban.
    **changed from partial restrictions under June travel ban.
    ***applies only to immigrant visas.

    The new proclamation moves two countries — Laos and Sierra Leone — from partial to full travel restrictions. It is lowering restrictions on only one country: Turkmenistan. 

    Trump will allow nonimmigrant visas, like student visas, to be processed for Turkmenistani citizens “because Turkmenistan has engaged productively with the United States and demonstrated significant progress since the previous Proclamation,” Trump’s proclamation said. 

    Turkmenistan’s embassy on Wednesday said the country had shown “substantial progress in improving identity-management and information-sharing procedures.”

    Immigrants from Turkmenistan will continue to be denied entry.

    Source link

  • Trump calls for federal policy framework preempting state AI laws

    Trump calls for federal policy framework preempting state AI laws

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

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday challenging the growing ecosystem of state AI laws and setting the stage for a federal policy to oversee the technology, citing concerns over compliance challenges for businesses and stymying innovation. 

    The executive order tasks U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi with creating an AI Litigation Task Force in the next 30 days to challenge state AI laws that “unconstitutionally regulate interstate commerce” or clash with existing federal laws. Trump also called for a national policy framework for AI that would preempt state AI laws, add child safety protections, ensure copyright safeguards and hinder censorship. 

    “My administration must act with the Congress to ensure that there is a minimally burdensome national standard – not 50 discordant State ones,” the order said. “The resulting framework must forbid State laws that conflict with the policy set forth in this order.” 

    States will face evaluation of their AI laws under the executive order, as well as potential restrictions on funding if their laws are found to be burdensome, according to the document.

    The proposal was met with sharp criticism from some advocates and lawmakers including Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who described the executive order as “dangerous, and most likely illegal,” in a post on social media platform X. 

    “Trump’s new executive order tries to eliminate state AI laws – in both red and blue states – that are protecting Americans from harmful deepfakes, scams, and online exploitation,” Klobuchar said on X. “We shouldn’t remove the few protections Americans have as Congress fails to act.” 

    Trump’s move to create roadblocks for state AI law implementation aligns with the interests of tech companies, which have worked against state regulations in 2025 as new models, agentic tools and applications spread among enterprises. 

    Despite its attempt to slow state efforts regulating AI, the executive order isn’t likely to shift enterprise compliance or AI governance strategies as a result, said Forrester Principal Analyst Alla Valente. 

    “They can’t pull back on what they’re doing when it comes to AI standards, assessments, controls and governance,” Valente said. “They’re going to have to stay the course on it.”

    Companies building AI products, particularly in highly regulated fields such as healthcare, are aware they can’t adopt a technology without managing risk, said Alaap Shah, an AI, privacy, cybersecurity and health IT attorney at Epstein Becker Green. Many companies that have already adopted compliance frameworks based on consensus-based standards will likely continue to implement them, he added.  

    Still, businesses will continue to advance AI development and deployment regardless of the state of the regulatory landscape, Shah said. 

    “It’s sort of like a build now, fail fast, mentality and investors are continuing to invest,” Shah said. 

    The pushback against state AI regulation comes at a time when tech companies like Google, OpenAI, AWS, Microsoft, Meta and more are investing billions in building out infrastructure in the U.S. and globally. Gartner estimated that global AI spending will reach $1.5 trillion in 2025. 

    Google and OpenAI earlier this year advocated for a federal policy preempting state AI laws. Meta also launched a lobbying effort to support political candidates who aligned with the company’s views on AI oversight, marking another step by Big Tech against state AI regulation after a proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI laws failed to pass in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. 

    What CIOs can expect from U.S. states  

    As the AI market rapidly expands, U.S. states including California, Colorado, Connecticut and Texas have passed AI legislation in an attempt to regulate AI model developers and deployers. California’s AI law requirements stand to have a particular effect on CIOs and businesses because the law imposes direct obligations on companies that run data centers or are building their own AI models. 

    Source link

  • International Students Afraid Under the Trump Administration

    International Students Afraid Under the Trump Administration

    The vast majority of students surveyed reported feeling “moderately,” “very” or “extremely” fearful about their visa status.

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | aapsky/iStock/Getty Images | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    A new national survey from Stop AAPI Hate, a coalition dedicated to fighting discrimination against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, found that international students are experiencing heightened fear and uncertainty under the Trump administration.

    The survey, released Wednesday, drew on quantitative and qualitative data from 87 graduate and undergraduate international students from 36 U.S. colleges and universities.

    It found that more than half of respondents, 53 percent, felt “not at all safe.” About 88 percent reported feeling a decreased sense of belonging and said they were holding back from political engagement, and 86 percent changed how they use social media out of fear. The majority, 90 percent, reported feeling “moderately,” “very” or “extremely” fearful about their visa status.

    Students detailed their fears further in qualitative responses, including one that expressed fear of “being kidnapped by ICE without due process, being disappeared into the detention system, [and] being denied healthcare if detained.” Others described fears about family members being whisked away or about disrupted academic and career trajectories. Chinese students in particular raised concerns about being surveilled and targeted as a national security threat, invoking Japanese Americans’ incarceration during World War II, according to the report.

    Respondents reported that campuses offered supports including mental health care, travel guidance and updates about student visa policies, but 48 percent said campuses didn’t provide guidance about how to complete their studies and 38 percent lacked legal aid resources.

    Students also discouraged others from coming to the U.S. for their studies.

    “Run, don’t come,” one student wrote.

    “America is no longer the land for dreams,” said another.

    Source link

  • FIRE statement on Trump demand for social media history of foreign tourists

    FIRE statement on Trump demand for social media history of foreign tourists

    On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced that it would require foreign tourists to the United States to provide five years of social media history to enter the country. Americans have 60 days to comment on the proposal. FIRE plans to publish a formal comment outlining why this is a serious threat to free expression.

    The following can be attributed to Sarah McLaughlin, FIRE’s senior scholar for global expression:

    Those who hope to experience the wonders of the United States — from Yellowstone to Disneyland to Independence Hall — should not have to fear that self-censorship is a condition of entry. Requiring temporary visitors here for a vacation or business to surrender five years of their social media to the U.S. will send the message that the American commitment to free speech is pretense, not practice. This is not the behavior of a country confident in its freedoms.

    Americans should not feel that they must silence themselves at home for fear that their online expression will bar their access to travel overseas. Therefore we shouldn’t put tourists coming here in that bind. Call it the golden rule of free expression: Treat the speech of visitors the way we want to see Americans’ expression treated abroad. 

    Source link

  • George Mason faculty urge leaders to reject Trump deals risking ‘institutional autonomy’

    George Mason faculty urge leaders to reject Trump deals risking ‘institutional autonomy’

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

    Dive Brief:

    • George Mason University’s faculty senate on Wednesday urged the public Virginia institution’s leadership to rebuke any deal with the Trump administration that would undermine its independence.
    • In a newly passed resolution, the senate said recent federal deals struck by other colleges have set a precedent in which “administrative convenience takes precedence over the faculty’s constitutional and professional responsibility.” The resolution urged George Mason’s board and president to reject any similar settlement with the Trump administration to end federal investigations into the university. 
    • George Mason leaders must also decline the administration’s separate higher education compact, it said, as that proposal seeks to “blur the constitutional distinction between voluntary funding conditions and compelled oversight.”

    Dive Insight:

    Under President Donald Trump, the departments of Education and Justice have opened at least four investigations into George Mason since this summer, targeting the university’s diversity, equity and inclusion work.

    George Mason’s faculty senate warned the governing board Wednesday against cutting a deal with the DOJ that puts the university under “continuing federal supervision.” And any settlement must involve “transparent deliberation and meaningful faculty consultation,” as required by George Mason’s shared governance policies, the senate said.

    Faculty cited the University of Virginia’s recent deal with the federal government as one that did not meet these standards. 

    The state flagship in October agreed, in part, to adhere to the DOJ’s guidance against DEI efforts and to make quarterly oversight reports for three years. In exchange, the federal government suspended and will eventually end five DOJ investigations into UVA and continued to give the university access to research funding.

    The resolution from George Mason’s faculty senate said UVA had “negotiated in secrecy, without faculty consultation” and imposed “years of federal monitoring and mandatory reporting that chill free inquiry, constrain legitimate academic debate, and erode shared governance.”

    Just six weeks after the Education Department announced a probe into George Mason, it formally accused the university of illegally using race and other protected characteristics when making hiring and promotion decisions. As in other federal investigations into George Mason, the department singled out the university’s president, Gregory Washington, who has been an ardent supporter of diversity initiatives during his five-year tenure.

    The agency gave the university 10 days to meet a list of demands to resolve the investigation. Among other requirements, one condition would have compelled Washington to publicly apologize. The president instead firmly rebuked the Education Department’s findings, with his lawyer calling them “a legal fiction.”

    In contrast, George Mason’s governing board said that it would seek to negotiate with the Trump administration to resolve the allegations. The board also said Washington’s attorney would be involved in talks with the Education Department.

    The faculty senate resolution pushed George Mason’s leaders to not accept Trump’s proposed higher education compact or any agreement that “conditions federal funding on the surrender of institutional autonomy or faculty governance.”

    Through the compact, the Trump administration seeks to have colleges voluntarily agree with its policy agenda in exchange for research funding incentives rather than its playbook of seeking compliance through unprecedented punitive actions.

    But the faculty senate argued in their resolution that the compact’s “promise of ‘excellence’ masks a fundamental shift of authority from university faculty and governing boards to federal agencies.”

    Further complicating matters, George Mason’s board currently has just six voting members — down from the usual 16 — meaning it doesn’t have a quorum. Since June, the governing bodies of George Mason and two other Virginia public colleges have been in a state of political flux due to a fight between a Democrat-controlled state Senate committee and Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin over his university board selections.

    The committee rejected many of Youngkin’s selections, and despite his efforts to install them anyway, court decisions have blocked them from serving.

    The faculty senate on Wednesday said that the board should not negotiate or sign off on any substantial agreement “affecting curriculum development, research priorities, faculty governance, or the allocation of university resources” without members who are “properly appointed and duly confirmed” by the Virginia General Assembly.

    Virginia’s governor-elect, Democrat Abigail Spanberger, last month raised similar concerns over potential actions taken by UVA’s board, which has 12 of its intended 17 members. 

    George Mason’s board — and the board’s leader — have come under scrutiny from faculty and lawmakers.

    In July, the George Mason chapter of the American Association of University Professors voted no-confidence in the board and urged it to defend Washington.

    And the leaders of Virginia’s state senate accused Charles Stimson, head of George Mason’s board, of a conflict of interest in September and called for him to resign if he did not recuse himself from discussions related to the federal investigations. 

    Stimson is a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank the AAUP found to be among those behind the wave of state-level anti-DEI legislation. The foundation also created Project 2025, a wide-ranging conservative blueprint for Trump’s second term whose policies the president has embraced after distancing himself from the handbook as a candidate.

    Stimson, whose term runs through June 2027, rejected calls to either recuse himself or step down.

    Source link

  • How Can Unions Defend Worker Power Under Trump 2.0? (Labor Notes)

    How Can Unions Defend Worker Power Under Trump 2.0? (Labor Notes)

    In the December issue: 

    New York’s Working Class Elects a Movement Mayor, by Luis Feliz Leon
    Zohran Kwame Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist and the Democratic nominee, will be New York City’s next mayor, after trouncing former Governor Andrew Cuomo in a primary and general election double whammy. Volunteers were galvanized by Mamdani’s relentless focus on the affordability crisis and principled stand against Israel’s unfolding genocide in Gaza.

    Canadian Postal Workers Strike Again, by Danielle Smith
    Canadian postal workers are back on strike—again—as they fight to save a vital public service. “By staying on the job and continuing to wait for demoralizing offers, we show that we accept this, we’re not going to fight. So we decided we’re going out,” said Nova Scotia letter carrier Basia Sokal. 

    Indiana Casino Dealers Are Bringing Back the Recognition Strike, by Alexandra Bradbury
    There are no clocks in a casino, so the dealers all set their phone alarms for noon. Everyone was a bundle of nerves. Before work, a couple of people threw up.

    But when the cacophony of alarms sounded, everyone lifted their hands in the air, slammed down the lids on their games of baccarat, blackjack, craps, and roulette, and announced they were on strike. “It was more powerful than anything I’ve ever felt in my life,” said dealer Tera Arnold. “I had goosebumps head to toe.”

    PLUS: Articles published so far in our Roundtable Series: How Can Unions Defend Worker Power Under Trump 2.0?, a Stewards’ Corner on welcoming immigrant members into the union, and more! 

    Source link

  • Northwestern Settles With Trump Administration

    Northwestern Settles With Trump Administration

    Northwestern University is the sixth to cut a deal with the administration.

    pabradyphoto/Getty Images

    Northwestern University has reached an agreement with the Trump administration to restore federal research funding. The university will pay the federal government $75 million and enact various changes. In return, the federal government will lift a freeze on millions in research funding.

    As part of the settlement, Northwestern agreed to adhere to federal antidiscrimination laws and to not give preferences in admissions, scholarships, hiring or promotion that are based on race, color or national origin; to maintain clear free speech policies; and to mandate antisemitism training for all students, faculty and staff. University officials will also reverse a 2024 deal made with pro-Palestinian student protesters in which Northwestern agreed to provide more support for Muslim, Middle Eastern and North African students and greater financial transparency.

    The settlement also bars Northwestern’s Feinberg School of Medicine from performing “hormonal interventions and transgender surgeries” on minor patients, according to language in the agreement. However, university officials have said that does not reflect a change in practice. Instead the agreement merely codifies that Northwestern will not provide such services.

    Northwestern is now the sixth university to strike a deal with the Trump administration, following settlements with the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, Brown University, the University of Virginia and Cornell University. Of those settlements, Northwestern has the second-highest financial payout at $75 million, trailing only Columbia, which agreed to pay $221 million. Unlike the Brown and Cornell settlements, all of the money will go directly to U.S. government.

    A Path Forward

    Northwestern leadership cast the settlement as a win, despite the $75 million payout.

    “It was the best and most certain method to restore our federal funding both now and in the future,” interim president Henry Bienen said in a video message following the settlement.

    The Trump administration froze $790 million in federal research funding earlier this year amid concerns about alleged antisemitism on campus following pro-Palestinian demonstrations in 2024. Last year, at the height of the protests, then-president Michael Schill struck a deal with pro-Palestinian students, known as the Dearing Meadow agreement, which has now been scuttled. That deal was heavily scrutinized by Congress when Schill testified in May 2024. (Schill would later resign, stepping down this fall amid the standoff over frozen federal research funding.)

    Though Harvard University brought a successful lawsuit against the federal government, prompting a judge to rule in July that a similar funding freeze there was illegal, Northwestern aimed to avoid a costly and protracted legal battle in an effort to quickly restore research dollars.

    Bienen argued in the video that “suing would have cost time and money that we believe the university could not risk” and the settlement was “the best path forward for us to be able to turn the page.” Despite an endowment valued at more than $14 billion, Bienen said, the university could not afford to sustain its research mission on its own. Had that freeze continued, Bienen said it would “gut our labs, drive away faculty, and set back entire fields of discovery.”

    Northwestern, like other wealthy institutions hit with federal funding freezes, has made a number of cost-cutting moves as it navigated sudden financial challenges related to the research enterprise. Earlier this year Northwestern eliminated 425 jobs as part of overall budget reductions.

    Now the federal funding spigot is set to be turned back on, though officials noted on the university website that “some terminated grants will not be reinstated, specifically those the federal government has cut” and that “these decisions were not specific to Northwestern.”

    The university did not admit to any wrongdoing in the settlement.

    Northwestern also answered a question that has been hanging over numerous other universities in its settlement communications, stating that it will not sign the Trump administration’s proposed “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education.” Originally floated to only a few universities before it was opened to all, the compact would provide preferential treatment in federal funding in return for various changes, many of which experts warn would undermine academic freedom. So far, few institutions have expressed interest in the proposal.

    A Landmark Deal

    Federal officials also hailed the settlement with Northwestern as a win.

    “Universities that receive federal funding have a responsibility to comply with the law, including protecting against racial discrimination and antisemitism,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division said in a news release. “We appreciate the significant improvements Northwestern has made and are gratified to reach an agreement that safeguards of rights [sic] of all the university’s applicants, students, and employees.”

    Education Secretary Linda McMahon called the settlement a landmark deal.

    “The deal cements policy changes that ‘will protect students and other members of the campus from harassment and discrimination,’ and it recommits the school to merit-based hiring and admissions. The reforms reflect bold leadership at Northwestern, and they are a roadmap for institutional leaders around the country that will help rebuild public trust in our colleges and universities,” McMahon said in the DOJ news release that announced the settlement.

    Source link

  • Fewer New International Students Enroll at U.S. Colleges Amid Trump Restrictions – The 74

    Fewer New International Students Enroll at U.S. Colleges Amid Trump Restrictions – The 74


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

    New international students enrolling at U.S. colleges declined sharply this fall, a concerning development for universities that rely on those students for research, tuition revenue and the diversity they bring to campus culture. It could, however, create more space for U.S. residents at those campuses.

    Enrollments of new international students were down 17% compared to fall 2024, according to a report released Monday by the Institute of International Education, which surveyed more than 800 colleges about their fall 2025 enrollments. The institute, a nonprofit organization based in New York, publishes an annual report that examines the enrollment of international students. 

    The fall data was not broken down by state, so the scale of decline in California is unclear. At USC, which enrolls more international students than any other California college, overall enrollment of international students is down 3% this fall, according to a campus spokesperson. That includes returning and first-time students, so the drop could be much higher for new arrivals. USC this fall enrolls about 12,000 international students, or 26% of its total student population, according to the college. About half of those students are from China. 

    The declines come amid a changing landscape for international students under the Trump administration, which has delayed visa processing, created travel restrictions and pressured some campuses to recruit and admit fewer students from other countries. The colleges surveyed this fall by the institute cited visa application concerns and travel restrictions as top factors in the decline. 

    “We are confronting major headwinds with what I would say are poor policy decisions that the administration is taking. And that is creating a climate for international students that signals that you’re not welcome here,” said Fanta Aw, CEO of NAFSA, a nonprofit for international education and exchange.

    President Donald Trump has said that he wants to lower the number of international students at U.S. colleges to leave more room at those campuses for U.S. students. “It’s too much because we have Americans that want to go there and to other places, and they can’t go there,” he said earlier this year, referencing the number of international students at Harvard and other universities.

    For the full 2024-25 academic year, new international student enrollments were down by 7%, driven by a 15% drop among new international graduate students, compared to 2023-24. However, the number of new undergraduates was up by 5%. Trump took office in January, just before the start of the spring semester at most colleges. 

    In the U.S., students from India were the largest group of international students, accounting for 30.8% of all international students, followed by students from China, with 22.6% of enrollments.

    In the 2024-25 academic year in California, the largest share of international students were from China, and they made up 35.4% of enrollments, followed by students from India at 20.9%. Overall enrollment of international students in California was down 1.1% in 2024-25. 

    USC enrolled the most international students of any California university, followed by four University of California campuses: Berkeley, Los Angeles, San Diego and Irvine. According to the report, the total number of enrolled international students were: 12,020 at Berkeley, 10,769 at UCLA, 10,545 at San Diego, and 7,638 at Irvine.

    Across the state, international students make up about 7% of enrollments at four-year colleges, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. They make up a large share of graduate students, accounting for 31% of graduate students at UC campuses, 15% at private nonprofit universities, and 12% at California State University campuses. 

    Freya Vijay, 20, a third-year student from Canada studying business administration at USC, said she always planned to come to the United States for college. 

    “In terms of business and just the economy, you have Wall Street, you have New York, Chicago, L.A., and San Francisco, all these big cities that dominate what’s going on in the world,” she said. “So immediately, in terms of opportunity, my mind was set on the States.” 

    In addition to visa and travel restrictions, the Trump administration has directly requested — or threatened, as some have called it — California campuses to limit enrollments of international students. The administration’s compact offer to USC last month would have forced the university to cap international enrollment at 15% for undergraduates and limit enrollment from any one country to 5%.

    USC has since rejected the compact, which also would have required the university to make a number of other changes, including committing to “transforming or abolishing institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle and even spark violence against conservative ideas.” 

    Separately, in a settlement proposal to UCLA, the Trump administration calls on the campus to ensure that “foreign students likely to engage in anti-Western, anti-American, or antisemitic disruptions or harassment” are not admitted. UCLA is still in negotiations with the administration and has not yet reached a deal. The Trump administration has charged the campus with antisemitism and civil rights violations. 

    Even amid the turmoil, experts say they expect California universities to continue recruiting international students. Julie Posselt, a professor of education at USC’s Rossier School of Education, noted that at research universities, much of the research is being carried out by international graduate students. 

    “Especially in STEM fields, international students are really central to the research functions of universities,” Posselt said. “Enrolling international students is not optional. It is absolutely a part of the fabric of what makes universities great.” 

    On top of that, colleges have financial incentives to enroll international students. That’s especially true at UC campuses, which charge international students and students from other states much higher rates of tuition than California residents. In the 2026-27 academic year, new international and out-of-state undergraduates at UC will pay nearly $52,000 in tuition, more than triple what in-state students will be charged. Nonresidents in graduate programs also generally pay higher rates than residents.

    Facing pressure from the state Legislature to make more room for California residents, UC in 2017 passed a policy to cap nonresident enrollment at 18%, with a higher percentage allowed for campuses that were already above that mark. But the system still gets significant tuition revenue from nonresidents, including international students, which UC says supports the system’s core operations and helps to lower the cost of attendance for California residents.  

    In a Nov. 10 interview with Fox News, Trump seemed to acknowledge the importance of international students, saying colleges might “go out of business” without them.

    “You don’t want to cut half of the people, half of the students from all over the world that are coming into our country — destroy our entire university and college system — I don’t want to do that,” he said. 

    International students also bring diverse perspectives and “a richness to the campus culture,” said Stett Holbrook, a spokesperson for the University of California system. “That’s something we really appreciate and try to cultivate.”

    At USC, the presence of international students from more than 130 countries means there are “innumerable opportunities at USC to encounter different perspectives” and “experience new cultures,” a spokesperson said in a statement. 

    Vijay, the USC student from Canada, said she regularly boasts about USC to friends, adding that she hopes attending remains an option for other international students. 

    “I always think it’s just such a great opportunity and that no international student should ever take it for granted,” she said. “I wish other internationals could experience it.”

    This story was originally published on EdSource.


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • St. Augustine’s expresses interest in Trump compact — with big caveats

    St. Augustine’s expresses interest in Trump compact — with big caveats

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Saint Augustine’s University told the U.S. Department of Education that it wants to “participate in and help shape” the Trump administration’s proposed compact that seeks to control a range of academic and operational policies in exchange for preferential access to federal funding.
    • However, leaders from the historically Black institution caveated their support over concerns that aspects of the compact as written “risk unintended consequences that would impede our ability to serve students effectively.”
    • “Despite these concerns, Saint Augustine’s University remains eager to participate as a constructive partner and early-engagement institution,” the leaders of the private North Carolina university said in a letter obtained by Fox News. They requested “a dialogue process” with the Education Department to facilitate “mission-sensitive accommodations” for HBCUs.

    Dive Insight:

    Last month, the Trump administration offered nine high-profile research colleges a deal — priority for federal grants in exchange for enacting a wide range of policies aligning with the president’s higher education goals.

    Some of the compact’s terms, while unprecedented, are straightforward, such as freezing tuition rates for five years, requiring standardized testing for undergraduate applicants, and capping international students’ share of undergraduate enrollment at 15%. 

    Others go beyond cut-and-dry policy changes, such as publicly auditing the viewpoints of employees and students and potentially changing or ending campus units that purposefully “punish” or “belittle” conservative ideas.

    Seven of the initially invited colleges rejected the deal, and, as of Thursday afternoon, the remaining two have yet to publicly accept or decline the offer.

    But a few colleges have sought to take their place after President Donald Trump appeared to open the compact offer to all higher ed institutions. 

    Saint Augustine’s letter makes it the third college — and the first HBCU — to publicly express interest in the bargain.

    The New College of Florida — in a move in line with its conservative makeover under Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — became the first college to publicly volunteer to sign the compact on Oct. 27. The following day, Valley Forge Military College offered to accept the deal as well, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

    But unlike New College and the military college, Saint Augustine’s did not give the proposed compact a full-throated endorsement.

    Neither the Education Department nor the university responded to questions Thursday.

    Verjanis Peoples, the university’s newly appointed interim president, and Sophie Gibson, chair of its board of trustees, warned that the compact as written is “not compatible with the statutory mission and federal mandate under which HBCUs operate.”

    “Because our mission is not ornamental but foundational, we cannot implement requirements that would directly conflict with our identity as a Historically Black University or undermine our ability to serve the populations for whom we were created,” they wrote in their letter, which Fox News reported as being sent to the Education Department on Wednesday.

    Peoples and Gibson cited a handful of the compact’s provisions, including one requiring signatories to not consider race, sex, religion and other characteristics “explicitly or implicitly” in admissions or financial aid. 

    The pair said the restriction, “while well intentioned,” conflicts with Title III of the Higher Education Act, which in part provides colleges grant funding and establishes a program meant to strengthen HBCUs. The Trump administration’s proposed deal would also run contrary to “the explicit purpose of HBCUs to expand access for Black students and historically marginalized communities,” they said.

    The compact said it would grant exceptions for religious and single-sex institutions to limit admissions based on religious belief and sex, respectively, but did not address HBCUs.

    Other elements of the Trump administration’s proposal could also hinder HBCUs, Peoples and Gibson said. 

    These colleges typically maintain smaller endowments and would have a difficult time absorbing the costs of a tuition freeze. A cap on international enrollment would disproportionately hit HBCUs, which have “global partnerships across the African diaspora,” they said.

    Saint Augustine’s leaders also flagged a compact provision that would require colleges to adopt definitions of gender and sex in step with Trump’s executive order saying the federal government would only recognize two sexes, male and female, that cannot be changed. These definitions have been rebuked by the scientific and medical communities.

    HBCUs could face operational challenges if they adopt this language given their “inclusive campus policies shaped by both community needs and regulatory frameworks,” the letter said.

    “Such provisions would unintentionally force HBCUs to choose between compliance and survival, a position that is neither feasible nor consistent with congressional intent,” Peoples and Gibson said.

    Should the Trump administration take Saint Augustine’s up on its offer, the embattled university could gain a financial lifeline amidst ongoing operational turmoil.

    In recent years, Saint Augustine’s has had its accreditation revoked, then reinstated, then revoked again. The university is operating as an accredited institution this fall because of a preliminary court injunction temporarily reversing the latest revocation.

    The university’s accreditor, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, has raised concerns over its finances and governance.

    Saint Augustine’s has attempted different tactics to address its ongoing budget issues, including pursuing land lease deals, taking out loans and drastically cutting its workforce.

    Source link