Tag: University

  • University of Michigan Axes DEI

    University of Michigan Axes DEI

    The University of Michigan announced Thursday that it will essentially eliminate all diversity, equity and inclusion efforts on its campus. That includes shuttering two diversity offices, the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and the Office for Health Equity and Inclusion, and ending its DEI 2.0 Strategic Plan.

    The changes come in response to federal anti-DEI actions, including executive orders and the Feb. 14 Dear Colleague letter, which declared all race-based programs in higher education illegal. Michigan’s decision was made in consultation with “various stakeholders regarding our DEI programs,” according to the announcement.

    The university said it plans to increase investments in student-facing programs, including financial aid, a scholarship program for former foster children and student success resources.

    The university has long been a champion of DEI efforts, funneling nearly $240 million into such programs over the past nine years, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, though some have critiqued the efforts for appearing to have little impact despite the big price tag.

    Source link

  • Brown University targets student journalist for sending DOGE-like emails

    Brown University targets student journalist for sending DOGE-like emails

    “Describe what tasks you performed in the past week.” 

    That’s what student journalist Alex Shieh asked 3,805 administrators at Brown University in a March 18 email. The backlash was swift. 

    Just two days later, Brown told Shieh it was reviewing his DOGE-inspired email — based on allegations that he had “emotionally harmed” several employees and “misrepresented” himself by saying he was a reporter for the conservative student newspaper The Brown Spectator, which he was. 

    Elon Musk, de facto head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), wields a chainsaw at the 2025 Conservative Political Action Conference.

    In Brown’s letter, officials also claimed he violated operational procedures and demanded he “return any confidential information,” warning that his access to university data systems could be restricted.

    Days later, Associate Dean and Associate Director of Student Conduct & Community Standards Kirsten Wolfe threatened to charge Shieh with “failure to comply” unless he provided evidence that he had deleted unspecified confidential information that Brown alleged he may have accessed. Wolfe also demanded Shieh keep even the existence of this investigation private. Nor has Brown revealed what confidential information they believe he published, and Shieh denies having taken any confidential information.

    He pointed out that even if he did have any confidential information — an allegation the university has not begun to substantiate — providing evidence that he deleted it would also provide Brown incriminating evidence that he had the information in the first place — violating Brown’s promise that students have a right against self-incrimination

    Brown’s response here flies in the face of its due process and free expression guarantees, and threatens to chill student reporting on campus. Due process is essential not just to guarantee defendants a fair shake, but to uphold the legitimacy of campus disciplinary proceedings. It also acts as a bulwark protecting students’ individual liberties. As FIRE has said before, universities that guarantee their students free expression cannot base investigations on the very speech they promise to protect — and for good reason. 

    Telling someone they are the target of an investigation can have a chilling effect on speech, especially in cases like this one, where universities also can’t use chilling investigations as fishing expeditions. Brown’s effort to get Shieh himself to substantiate its assertions against him by providing evidence he thinks could relate to the allegations against him flips the disciplinary process on its head. ​​

    Fundamental fairness requires that the university bear the burden of proving the allegations, not the student to prove his innocence.

    Moreover, Brown’s threats also burden newsgathering practices protected by the university’s guarantee of press freedom. Certainly, administrators are within their rights to investigate actual breaches of confidentiality policies. But investigating journalism, offbeat though it may be, is a far cry from that.

    University President Christina Paxson declared in a recent letter that Brown will defend free expression against encroachments from the federal government. Shieh’s case suggests that her promise does not extend to Brown’s own encroachments on free expression.


    FIRE defends the rights of students and faculty members — no matter their views — at public and private universities and colleges in the United States. If you are a student or a faculty member facing investigation or punishment for your speech, submit your case to FIRE today. If you’re a faculty member at a public college or university, call the Faculty Legal Defense Fund 24-hour hotline at 254-500-FLDF (3533). If you’re a college journalist facing censorship or a media law question, call the Student Press Freedom Initiative 24-hour hotline at 717-734-SPFI (7734).

    Source link

  • Columbia University, Mahmoud Khalil, DEI, law firms, and more

    Columbia University, Mahmoud Khalil, DEI, law firms, and more

    We explore how censorship is impacting institutions —
    from universities to law firms to the Maine House of
    Representatives.

    Timestamps:

    00:00 Intro

    01:40 Federal government cuts Columbia’s funding

    16:57 Updates on the Mahmoud Khalil case

    27:01 Ed Martin’s Georgetown letter

    34:59 Trump targeting law firms

    55:01 Maine House censure of Rep. Laurel Libby

    01:03:37 Outro

    Guests:

    Will
    Creeley
    , FIRE’s legal director

    Conor
    Fitzpatrick
    , FIRE’s supervising senior attorney

    Lindsie
    Rank
    , FIRE’s director of campus rights advocacy

    Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today and
    get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and
    more. If you became a FIRE Member
    through a donation to FIRE at thefire.org and would like access to
    Substack’s paid subscriber podcast feed, please email
    sotospeak@thefire.org.

    Show notes:

    – “DOJ,
    HHS, ED, and GSA announce initial cancelation of grants and
    contracts to Columbia University worth $400 million
    ” U.S.
    Department of Justice (2025)


    HHS, ED, and GSA follow up letter to Columbia
    . U.S.
    Department of Health & Human Services, U.S. Department of
    Education, U.S. Government Services Administration (2025)

    – “Columbia
    yields to Trump in battle over federal funding
    ” The Wall
    Street Journal (2025)

    – “Advancing
    our work to combat discrimination, harassment, and antisemitism at
    Columbia
    ” Columbia University (2025)

    – “Columbia
    caves to feds — and sets a dangerous precedent
    ” FIRE
    (2025)

    – “ED,
    HHS, and GSA Respond to Columbia University’s Actions to Comply
    with Joint Task Force Pre-Conditions
    ” U.S. Department of
    Education (2025)

    – “FIRE
    demands answers from Trump admin officials on arrest of Mahmoud
    Khalil
    ” FIRE (2025)

    – “Brief
    of Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner’s Motion for Preliminary
    Injunction – Khalil v. Joyce
    ” FIRE (2025)

    – “We will be
    revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in
    America so they can be deported.
    ” Secretary of State Marco
    Rubio via X (2025)

    – “‘ICE proudly
    apprehended and detained Mahmoud Khalil, a radical foreign
    Pro-Hamas student on the campus of @Columbia University. This is
    the first arrest of many to come.
    ‘ President Donald J.
    Trump” The White House via X (2025)

    – “WATCH: White
    House downplays stock market declines as ‘a snapshot’
    ” PBS
    NewsHour (2025)

    – “Secretary
    Rubio’s remarks to the press
    ” U.S. Department of State
    (2025)

    – “Mahmoud
    Khalil. Notice to appear.
    ” Habeeb Habeeb via X (2025)

    – “Alien
    and Sedition Acts
    ” National Archives (1798)


    Ed Martin’s letter to Georgetown Law Dean William Treanor
    .
    (2025)


    Dean Treanor’s response to Ed Martin.
    (2025)

    – “Trump,
    Perkins Coie and John Adams
    ” The Wall Street Journal
    (2025)

    – “Suspension
    of Security Clearances and Evaluation of Government
    Contracts
    ” The White House (2025)

    – “Addressing
    Risks from Perkins Coie LLP
    ” The White House (2025)

    – “Addressing
    risks from Paul Weiss
    ” The White House (2025)

    – “Lawyers
    who anger the Feds face new penalties by decree
    ” The CATO
    Institute (2025)

    – “Today,
    President Donald J. Trump agreed to withdraw his March 14, 2025
    Executive Order regarding the Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton &
    Garrison LLP law firm (‘Paul, Weiss’), which has entered into the
    following agreement with the President…
    ” President Trump
    via TruthSocial (2025)

    – “Head
    of Paul, Weiss says firm would not have survived without deal with
    Trump
    ” The New York Times (2025)

    – “House
    resolution relating to the censure of Representative Laurel D.
    Libby of Auburn by the Maine House of Representatives

    Maine House of Representatives (2025)

    – “Maine’s
    censure of lawmaker for post about trans student-athlete is an
    attack on free speech
    ” FIRE (2025)

    – “Maine
    State Rep. Laurel Libby disagreed with biological males competing
    in women’s sports, and now, the Maine State House is censuring
    her.
    ” Sen. Kennedy via X (2025)

    – “The
    open society and its enemies
    ” Karl Popper (1945)

    – “Cyber
    rights: Defending free speech in the digital age
    ” Mike
    Godwin (1995)

    Source link

  • The Learning Centred University with Steven Mintz

    The Learning Centred University with Steven Mintz

    Hi everyone, Tiffany and Sam here — your World of Higher Education podcast producers. While Alex is away in Japan, we’re here to introduce this week’s episode.

    In this interview, Alex speaks with Steven Mintz, a renowned scholar and postdoctoral researcher, and author of the book, “The Learning-Centered University: Making College a More Developmental, Transformational, and Equitable Experience” In the following conversation, Mintz discusses what makes a learning-centered university, the benefits of active learning over traditional lectures, and the practical challenges faced in implementing these changes. The discussion also delves into alternative scalable learning models, competency-based education, and the importance of holistic student support systems. Steven also reflects on his experience leading digital learning transformations and provides actionable steps for universities aiming to become learning-centered institutions. Have a listen.


    The World of Higher Education Podcast
    Episode 3.25 | The Learning Centred University with Steven Mintz 

    Transcript

    Alex Usher: Steve, your book makes a pretty strong case for universities shifting from being to what you’d call teaching-centred to being learning-centred. What does that actually mean? In practice, what is a learning-centred university, and how is it different from a teaching-centred one?

    Steven Mintz: If you look at the statistics—even in discussion classes—about 80 percent of classroom time is spent with the instructor transmitting information. And while you can certainly learn from listening to lectures, you can learn a lot more if you’re actually engaged in inquiry, analysis, discussion, and the like. What we’ve done is turn teaching pretty much into a performance, as opposed to focusing on what we’re really interested in—which is learning.

    Alex Usher: So, to use a phrase that was popular about a decade ago—more “guide on the side,” less “sage on the stage”?

    Steven Mintz: I actually disagree with that statement. I believe a professor needs to be a learning architect—essentially, a learning engineer who figures out what students need to know and develops strategies to help them acquire that knowledge. So, it’s not quite as passive as “guide on the side.” A professor is not just a tutor; a professor is a designer of learning experiences—or at least, that’s what a professor ought to be.

    Alex Usher: We’ll come back to how we achieve that in a minute, but—it seemed to me, as I was reading the book, that a lot of what you’re arguing for, implicitly at least, is a lot more resource-intensive than what we’re doing now. You know, we’re talking about smaller classes, personalized instruction, that kind of thing. How do universities manage that? How can they achieve it when budgets are shrinking all the time?

    Steven Mintz: Right now, we essentially have two types of classes: lecture classes and discussion classes. But there are other kinds of classes—other kinds of learning experiences—that we know work, and that we haven’t tried as much as we ought to. We know that in creative writing and art, students take studio classes, where they get a lot of input and feedback from peers. That’s scalable. We have experience with game-designed learning. The most famous example is Reacting to the Past, where students take on roles as historical actors. That’s expandable, and we know it works. Field-based learning works. Service-learning works. So let’s not stay wedded to just two models. Let’s think about other ways we can help students learn.

    Alex Usher: The great thing about the two types of classes we have now is that they seem easier to scale than what you’re talking about. Doesn’t cost come into it somewhere?

    Steven Mintz: Well, let’s think about that for a moment. If we adopt a hybrid approach, where a large part of the class is online and the active learning takes place face-to-face, that’s a scalable model. I’ve created interactive courseware with my students that includes simulations, animations, all kinds of exciting inquiry-based activities, and embedded assessments. But I combine that with active learning in the in-person environment. So in other words, by dividing the delivery, I can double the number of students served.

    Alex Usher: Presumably one of the barriers to this—and you’ll know this from your time in administration—is that it requires faculty to really change their approach, right? I mean, they’ve grown up in the kind of system you described, with those two kinds of classes, and many of them have become comfortable teaching that way over the course of their careers.

    How do you get faculty to rethink those traditional teaching methods? How do you incentivize them to adopt new approaches?

    Steven Mintz: You know, it’s shocking that college professors are the only professionals who aren’t mandated to do professional development. The assumption is that in graduate school, you learned everything you needed to know—and if you didn’t learn it there, you picked it up as an undergraduate by watching others teach. But we know we need to move in a different direction. So the question is: how do we do that?

    First of all, there are always individuals who are pace-setters—innovators—and we need to give those people greater leeway to do what they want to do.

    Second, we need to figure out how to offer professional development in ways that faculty find welcoming and appealing.

    Third, we need to showcase success. We need to reward and incentivize faculty to try new and interesting things.

    Many faculty members already have tools at their disposal that could offer real insight. For example, I get a lot of statistical information from my learning management system about student engagement and where students are getting confused. I can use that data to improve my classes. But we’re not doing enough to make it easy for faculty to use those tools.

    Alex Usher: One of the learning-centred models that’s often pitched is competency-based education. And it’s interesting—you talk a fair bit about it in your book. It strikes me that CBE is relatively straightforward in fields like nursing. Western Governors University, for example, is well known for its CBE models in nursing and other professional areas. But you don’t tend to see it in fields like English, history, or philosophy.

    How do you see competency-based education being integrated into the humanities, social sciences, or even the pure sciences?

    Steven Mintz: There are a couple of different ways to think about competency-based education—and one of those ways, I think, is quite misleading.

    Many faculty members assume that CBE is synonymous with online or asynchronous education. But that’s not how I see it. I think of it as an approach where you first determine what literacies and skills you want students to acquire, then figure out how to instill and cultivate those skills, and finally, how to assess them to make sure students have actually mastered them.

    This shouldn’t be a radical idea. Medical schools have already adopted competency-based education, and that’s largely because many medical students don’t go to lectures anymore.

    They’re do-it-yourself learners—they’re among the best students we have in higher education—and they needed a different approach. Medical schools have found that CBE is a big part of the answer. You tell students what they need to know, you tell them the level at which they need to perform—and, amazingly, they do it.

    Alex Usher: Well, they do it—but even medicine is a bit more outcome-based than, say, history or philosophy, right? I’m curious about your thoughts on examples like Minerva—the Minerva Project—and the way they’ve been trying to apply competency-based approaches to higher education. Their model involves having evaluators watch classroom recordings and assess whether students are demonstrating things like critical thinking or communication skills during those smaller, active learning phases. What’s your take on what Minerva has done?

    Steven Mintz: I’m all in favor of critical thinking, but it’s a pretty abstract term. If I want a student to analyze a work of literature, I can be much more precise than simply saying, “I want them to think critically about the text.” I want them to understand how the author uses language and characterization, what themes are embedded in the work, what symbols are being used, and how the text might be viewed from multiple perspectives. For example, how would a feminist critic read the text? A Marxist critic? A postmodernist? A postcolonialist? These are more precise in my mind—and we can objectively assess whether a student can demonstrate those skills. That’s where “critical thinking” as a term strikes me as overly abstract.

    Alex Usher: So it’s really about figuring out how to operationalize concepts like critical thinking—on a discipline-by-discipline basis.

    Steven Mintz: Precisely. When I think about my own history students, what do I want them to know? I want them to understand historical methods—how to conduct research. I want them to think like historians. That means seeing processes that unfold over time, and recognizing that everything has a history. I want them to have a command of content—and we all know how to measure that. In other words, let’s be precise about the actual learning objectives we want students to meet, and then figure out the best ways to measure them.

    Alex Usher: Steven, you argue that student support structures are really important to a learning-centred university model, and that they need to be redesigned. So, what role does holistic student support play in improving student outcomes? And how is it different from the current student support systems that most institutions have?

    Steven Mintz: We have, right now, all kinds of information that can tell us when students are off track. We have all kinds of information that can tell us that some classes have very high rates of Ds and Fs and withdrawals. And we don’t use that information—which strikes me as absurd. Because why not act proactively to help students when they’re off track? Why not act aggressively when they’re confused about a topic? We can measure that.

    Now, the key is what are called formative assessments. These are low-stakes, frequent assessments that just try to figure out what a student knows and what they don’t know and these are not high-pressure. In my own class, I have students use their cell phones to respond to certain questions, because it helps me understand where they are. I can then judge whether they’re engaged or disengaged, and what I can do to help them learn better.

    Alex Usher: So, technology is often seen as both a solution and a challenge in higher education reform. You know, these days we talk about AI, we talk about adaptive learning, online education—how do each of these things play a role in making learning-centred approaches scalable, while ensuring at the same time that technology doesn’t simply become a, uh, you know, a cost-cutting substitute for quality education?

    Steven Mintz: You know, I believe the key to a successful education—to a great education—is a relationship-rich education. Relationships with faculty and relationships with classmates. But that doesn’t mean we can’t use technology. Let me give you a couple of examples that I use, that I developed with a team of students.

    One is a simulation: you are Christopher Columbus. You are going to sail to the New World and back using current wind and ocean currents. So for every student, it’s different. And what the students discover is you have to sail along the coast of Africa before you swing west towards Brazil. Then you go up the coast of South America to the Caribbean. And to get back, you have to sail northward along the Atlantic coast to New England. And then you curve over towards England. And then head south along the European coast. For students, it’s Flight Simulator 2025. It’s an opportunity to play a bit with history, and it’s fun.

    Another simulation I give my students is—every student gets a number of 18th-century gravestones on Cape Cod. Each student gets different ones, so there’s no cheating possible. And what they do is they figure out how long people lived, whether men lived shorter or longer than women, to what extent children were likely to die, how old people lived—and they also analyze the iconography on the gravestones.

    They learn a lot about naming patterns. They learn about life. And they learn about it not through lecture, but by doing.

    Alex Usher: Look, you were once in a position to drive large-scale digital learning transformation, right? You were the director of the University of Texas System’s Institute for Transformational Learning—which ultimately was shut down after a few years. But looking back, what lessons did you take from that experience? What does it reveal about the challenges of implementing large-scale academic reform?

    Steven Mintz: Well, the first thing you learn, of course, is that it’s very difficult to do top-down. You have to have buy-in at every level. You have to have buy-in from senior leadership at the campuses, you have to have buy-in from faculty members, and the like.

    You can provide resources, which can help with buy-in, but mainly you have to find a coalition of the willing. You have to find innovative people who will buy into a project and who want to see it through—who really share your interest in improving student learning and then finding a way to do it.

    So let me give you an example. We opened a new university in South Texas, in the lower Rio Grande Valley—which is among the poorest parts of the country and urgently in need of more healthcare professionals. So we designed, in conjunction with the faculty, a competency-based biomedical pathway that we called Middle School to Medical School. In that program, every course was aligned. The English class was the literature of pain and illness. The history class was the history of medicine and public health. The economics class was health economics. The sociology class was the sociology of health. The art history class was representations of the body. In other words, what we were trying to do was produce well-rounded professionals. And everyone had a stake in that—not just the physicists, not just the chemists, not just the biologists, not just the mathematicians. Everyone had a stake in these students’ success. And together, we figured out what a wraparound program ought to look like.

    Alex Usher: So, if a university wanted to truly commit to becoming a learning-centred institution, what’s the first step they should take? My second question—my last question—is: how would they know they were on the right track? What metrics, if any, would you use to declare victory? To say, “Yes, now we are a learning-centred institution.” How would you know?

    Steven Mintz: Reform requires one of two things. It either requires a sense of urgency, or it requires a sense of opportunity. Now, many campuses these days feel a sense of urgency. We are experiencing what’s called the enrollment cliff. Because of changing demographics, we have fewer college students. And so, institutions—to survive—need to increase their retention and graduation rates. That’s the simplest solution to their economic problems. But other institutions, and many faculty, want to make a name for themselves. And that’s the opportunity they have: by doing something innovative, they can build their reputation. And more power to them, I say. This benefits everyone.

    So, how do we know that we’re getting there? It’s easy.

    We need to do many more exit surveys of students. We need to do more focus groups with students. And we need to ask them: How’s it going? What’s your level of engagement? Do you feel a sense of belonging on your campus? Do you have rich relationships with your faculty members? And if the answers are yes, then you’re accomplishing your mission. And if the answers are no, then you know you’re not.

    Alex Usher: Steven, thanks so much for joining us today.

    Steven Mintz: You’re welcome. It’s my pleasure.

    Alex Usher: And it just remains for me to thank our excellent producers, Sam Pufek and Tiffany MacLennan, and you—our viewers, listeners, and readers—for joining us. If you have any comments or questions about this week’s episode, or suggestions for future episodes, please don’t hesitate to get in contact with us at podcast@higheredstrategy.com. Please join us on our YouTube channel. Subscribe so you never miss an episode of The World of Higher Education Podcast.

    Next week, our guest is going to be Dara Melnyk. She’s currently a consultant and the co-host of Constructor University’s Innovative Universities global webinar series. We’ll be talking about what it is that makes a truly innovative university. 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 Studiosity. Student success, at scale – with an evidence-based ROI of 4.4x return for universities and colleges. Because Studiosity is AI for Learning — not corrections – to develop critical thinking, agency, and retention — empowering educators with learning insight. For future-ready graduates — and for future-ready institutions. Learn more at studiosity.com.

    Source link

  • Tufts University student detained. Protest follows. (WCVB Channel 5 Boston)

    Tufts University student detained. Protest follows. (WCVB Channel 5 Boston)

    An international student from Tufts University has been detained. Rumeysa Ozturk, 30, was meeting friends for iftar, a meal that breaks a fast at sunset during Ramadan when she was arrested.  

    Video obtained by The Associated Press appears to show six people, their faces covered, taking away Ozturk’s phone as she yells and is handcuffed. 

    Ozturk co-wrote an op-ed in The Tufts Daily criticizing the university’s response to its community union Senate passing resolutions that demanded Tufts “acknowledge the Palestinian genocide,” disclose its investments and divest from companies with direct or indirect ties to Israel.
    After the arrest, hundreds of Tufts students protested.  

    This arrest is consistent with Trump Administration efforts to intimidate and deport Muslim foreign students. Students from Cornell, Georgetown, Columbia University have also been detained.  

    Source link

  • Strengthening data and insights into our changing university research landscape by Jessica Corner

    Strengthening data and insights into our changing university research landscape by Jessica Corner

    The UK continues as a global leader in research and innovation and our universities are uniquely strong contributors, among which are the highest performing in the world. We have some of the highest-intensity innovation ecosystems in the world, with universities as the core driver. As a country, our invention record is well recognised. The UK, with its powerful life sciences effort, delivered one of the first UK COVID-19 vaccines, saving millions of lives around the world and only possible because of long-standing investment in research that became serendipitously essential. In cities across the UK, universities act as pillar institutions with positive and reinforcing effects on their local economies. We have a rich network of specialist institutions that excel in music, the arts, medicine and life sciences. Our universities continue to deliver discoveries, technologies, creative insights, talent for our industries and public services and so much more. Many have the scale and reach to deliver across the full span of research and innovation to enterprise and commercialisation.

    A unique feature, and underpinning this extraordinary record, is our dual support funding system. That system balances competitive grant funding from UKRI Research Councils, charities, business, and others with long-term stable underpinning funds to enable universities to pursue ambitious and necessary strategies, develop research strengths, foster talent, pivot towards new fields, collaborate and maintain research infrastructure.

    However, the sector faces unprecedented challenges. Erosion of the value of student fees and the growing costs of delivering education, disruptions to anticipated income from international student fees, a slow erosion of the value of QR, rising costs of research and a mismatch between this and cost recovery from grants has created a perfect storm and unsustainable operating models for most institutions. The additional £5bn a year in funding from universities’ own surpluses towards research and innovation is no longer guaranteed. The sector has and continues to evolve in response to a changing landscape, but consideration is needed about how best to support the sector to change.

    Research England’s role is to support a healthy, dynamic, diverse, and inclusive, research and innovation system in universities in England6. We work by facilitating and incentivising system coherence, acting as both champion and challenger. In partnership we aim to create and sustain the conditions for the system to continue delivering excellence and leverage resources far beyond funding provided by government. We are working to enhance the data and evidence to support our role as expert, evidence-based funder and on the outcomes that the funding delivers. In fulfilling this role and against the current context, Research England has two initiatives that we will be taking forward in the coming weeks.

    Our ongoing programme to review the principles underpinning our funding and mechanisms by which we allocate research funds to institutions has reached a point where we are seeking to increase the visibility and transparency of how these funds are deployed by institutions. We are developing an approach, designed to be light touch and low burden that asks universities to report back on their use of strategic institutional research funding. We will begin testing the approach with a selection of institutions in the coming months and, subject to the outcomes of this initial engagement, aim to roll out a pilot with institutions in the 2025/26 academic year. We will be communicating to institutions directly about the pilot in the early Autumn. In the second phase of this work, we intend to work with institutions to develop a forward-looking strategic element that will give insight into plans and then how decisions are made about the deployment of funding. For the programme, we are also reviewing the effectiveness of the different unhypothecated and ring-fenced research funds provided to institutions. When fully implemented, the information we will acquire will enable Research England greater visibility of the role of institutions and the contribution of our formula-based research funding (including QR) to the research and innovation system while also contributing to efforts to have more systematic and timely data.

    A second strand of work is our programme to monitor the implications for the sustainability of research in universities against the current financial context. We are seeking to better understand how challenges are impacting universities’ ability to deliver research and innovation and maintain research capabilities, capacity, and facilities and, in turn, further strengthen assurance with more robust data. In partnership with the Department for Innovation Science and Technology, we have commissioned the Innovation Research Caucus with OMB Research Ltd to undertake a survey into how institutions are responding to current pressures with respect to research and innovation. The survey will provide important data that can support advice to government and others on the extent of universities’ financial challenges, how these issues are being managed, and how this impacts their investment and planning in the research and innovation space. The approach is to provide insights that are currently not available at an aggregate level or in a timely way through national data sets. Additionally, Research England will be asking institutions to report on material changes they are making to research and innovation capabilities and capacity or in relation to wider changes in institutional form or organisation when these may affect the basis on which our funding is awarded.

    We continue to see our role as facilitator, enabler and partner and believe we have a strong reputation for having timely and robust insights into the conditions underpinning our great research and innovation system. These two programmes of work are being taken forward in support of universities and, against the current backdrop, will strengthen Research England’s fundamental role in the research and innovation system. We look forward to working in close partnership with universities as we take these critical work programmes forward.

    Source link

  • Dr. Marlene Tromp Named University of Vermont’s 28th President

    Dr. Marlene Tromp Named University of Vermont’s 28th President

    Dr. Marlene TrompThe University of Vermont (UVM) Board of Trustees has selected Dr. Marlene Tromp as the institution’s 28th president.

    Tromp, who is currently serving as president of Boise State University, will assume her new role later this summer.

    “Dr. Tromp brings with her the experience and ability for great success that will benefit the university, community, and state,” said Cynthia Barnhart, Board of Trustees chair and co-chair of the Presidential Search Advisory Committee.

    A first-generation college student raised in rural Wyoming,Tromp brings nearly 30 years of experience in higher education. During her six-year tenure at Boise State, she successfully navigated the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic while increasing student enrollment and improving affordability. Under her leadership, the university achieved record graduation rates and philanthropic funding while expanding its research footprint.

    “This is a university that has the power to truly lead the nation and even the world on several fronts,” Tromp said of UVM. “I’m so excited to work with my colleagues, the students, alumni, and friends to improve individual lives and the life of the community.”

    Tromp’s rural background appears to have been a significant factor in her selection.

    “She grew up with the experience of being in a rural state and understanding the importance of the flagship institution to that state, both urban and rural parts of the state. She really demonstrated an ability to connect well with Vermont culture, given that upbringing,” said Ron Lumbra, immediate past chair of the Board of Trustees and co-chair of the search committee. 

    A humanities scholar with a concentration in Victorian literature and culture, Tromp has published nine books and dozens of peer-reviewed papers. Her administrative experience includes serving as campus provost and executive vice chancellor at the University of California at Santa Cruz and vice provost and dean at Arizona State University.

    Senator Patrick Leahy, who met with Tromp during her campus visit, expressed confidence in her leadership abilities.

    “Dr. Tromp seems poised and ready to lead UVM. She clearly understands the impact and responsibilities UVM has in our state,” Leahy said.

    Campus leaders have also voiced strong support for the appointment. Athletic Director Jeff Schulman praised Tromp’s “experience, commitment to excellence and passion for UVM,” while Bill Falls, dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, described her as “an empathetic and collaborative leader.”

    Tromp holds a Bachelor of Arts from Creighton University, a Master of Arts in English from the University of Wyoming, and a Ph.D. from the University of Florida. She currently serves on the NCAA Division I Board of Directors and consults on higher education with the Federal Reserve Board of San Francisco.

    She will succeed Dr. Suresh Garimella, who led UVM from 2019 until October 2024 when he became president of the University of Arizona. Provost Dr. Patricia Prelock has been serving as interim president since Garimella’s departure.

    Source link

  • Higher education postcard: Purdue University

    Higher education postcard: Purdue University

    Greetings from Indiana!

    In 1862 the United States passed the first of a series of laws – known as the Morrill Land-Grant Acts – which allowed states to sell federally owned land to fund the creation of colleges. These colleges – known now as land-grant universities – form a large chunk of the US higher education system. And its important to note – as America tries to forget its history – that the land sold to fund them was often bought, granted by or stolen from Native American tribes.

    The state of Indiana decided in 1865 to take advantage of the act, and a process to decide where and how to spend the money began. The state could have chosen a couple of existing institutions, but in 1869 was swayed by proposals from Tippecanoe County which included pledges of $200,000 (about worth $4.6 million today) and 100 acres of land. And so Purdue University, named after the benefactor who had pledged the lion’s share of the $200,000, was established in West Lafayette, on the Wabash River.

    Purdue developed into a university focusing on engineering and agricultural subjects. This was under the guidance of Emerson E White, president of Purdue from 1876 to 1883. He sought to differentiate Purdue from the “classical” American universities, and the syllabus reflected this. Humanities and social sciences were not prohibited, but were not prioritised. He sought also to ban fraternities from campus, and when the Indiana state legislature required the university to allow fraternities, he resigned. But it was too late, and that year Purdue received no state grant.

    Purdue became a leading institution for research into steam traction on the railways. By the 1890s it owned several locomotives, and a railway dynamometer which enabled research. There was a local railroad – the Monon railroad – which operated works near Purdue. In 1891 the Purdue football team (gridiron, not association or union or league) beat neighbours Wabash College 44–0; there were suggestions that the team had included some ringers – boilermakers from the Monon works. Which led to the nickname Boilermakers, given to the university’s sports teams.

    (Its a bit of a tradition in American universities for their teams to have nicknames; a little like the now sometimes quaint nicknames used for football teams in Britain. A few still have local meaning, but other than journalists looking for copy, do many people still call their team by its nickname? Answers in the chat, please. But in America they are still used, it seems.)

    Purdue became the first US university to have its own airport, in 1934, and introduce credit bearing courses in learning to fly. Amelia Earhart was an instructor for those courses, and a career counsellor for women students. Her round-the-world flight attempt in 1937, in which she disappeared, used an aeroplane funded by Purdue’s research foundation.

    Purdue scientists discovered properties of the element germanium which enabled the invention of transistors. Transistors were fundamental to the development of electronics and computing. Transistors themselves were invented at Bell Laboratories but without germanium semiconducting crystals, which the Purdue team produced, transistors would not have operated quickly enough.

    In 2017 Purdue University bought Kaplan, the early online university, and transformed it into Purdue University Global.

    The card – here’s a jigsaw – shows the Boilermaker Special, Purdue’s official mascot. The Boilermaker was introduced in 1940, paid for by alumni and members of the Purdue Reamer Club, a student club formed as an alternative to the fraternity societies. The first vehicle comprised a body made by the Baldwin Locomotive Works, mounted on a Studebaker chassis. The card shows the third Boilermaker Special, which was in service from 1960 to 1993. It was made by General Motors, on a bus chassis. The current Boilermaker Special is the eighth; a ninth is expected to be in service from this summer.

    The card was posted in February 1973 to a couple in Washington DC:

    Came out here yesterday to let M.G. take a look at Purdue…

    Source link

  • University of California freezes hiring as it braces for funding cuts

    University of California freezes hiring as it braces for funding cuts

    Dive Brief:

    • The University of California is implementing a hiring freeze across its 10 campuses as it navigates potential funding cuts at both the federal and state levels, system President Michael Drake said in a message Wednesday. 
    • Drake also directed UC locations to roll out other cost-cutting measures, such as delaying maintenance and reducing travel expenses. 
    • I recognize this is a time of great uncertainty for many in our UC community and in higher education across the country,” Drake said. “Throughout our history as an institution and as a nation, we have weathered struggles and found new ways to show up for the people we serve.”

    Dive Insight:

    UC joins an ever-growing cohort of higher education institutions taking preemptive steps to brace their budgets against a storm of funding cuts and financial attacks coming from the Trump administration. 

    Harvard University, the University of Notre Dame and Northwestern University are just a few of the major research universities that have also frozen hiring in recent weeks as they brace for federal funding cuts potentially coming from multiple directions

    Many institutions have cited the 15% cap on indirect research cost funding that the National Institutes of Health announced in February. Such a reduction would amount to billions of dollars collectively and could translate into funding shortfalls in the tens of millions of dollars for many universities. 

    NIH is the largest funder of UC research, having provided a total $2.6 billion to the system in the 2023-24 academic year, according to the system. Among the system’s campuses that could be hardest hit, UCLA stands to lose $65 million under the funding cap, UC San Francisco $121 million and UC San Diego $102 million, according to a New York Times analysis.  

    Faced with massive cuts to its research funding from the agency, UC filed a declaration in support of the lawsuit against NIH brought by the California attorney general and more than 20 other states.

    A judge overseeing multiple lawsuits against NIH has paused the funding cap, but uncertainty abounds among higher education leaders over the issue and other potential funding stoppages in Washington. 

    The University’s legal team prepared for this moment and has been working diligently to protect the University and our mission through the courts,” Drake said. “These efforts have allowed us to stave off some of the immediate and projected financial impacts — but not all.”

    Even before President Donald Trump took office, UC faced potential future budget strains from state-level cuts. A fiscal 2025-26 budget proposal unveiled in January by Gov. Gavin Newsom would reduce UC’s funding by $271 million. At the time, Drake— who plans to step down as system leader at the end of the 2024-25 academic year —  expressed concern about how the cuts would affect UC students and services. 

    Prior to that, the system had been improving its financial trajectory, with the system’s overall total budget loss shrinking significantly in fiscal 2024 to $178 million, less than a tenth of the prior year’s shortfall. 

    In his message Wednesday, Drake said he asked the presidents of all UC locations to “prepare financial strategies and workforce management plans that address any potential shortfalls,” adding that “every action that impacts our University and our workforce will only be taken after serious and deliberative consideration.”

    Source link

  • More than 200,000 former Walden University students owe more than $9 Billion

    More than 200,000 former Walden University students owe more than $9 Billion

    The Higher Education Inquirer has recently received a Freedom of Information (FOIA) response regarding student loan debt held by former Liberty University students.  The FOIA was 25-01941-F.  

    Source link