Tag: workforce

  • The forthcoming NHS workforce plan must treat universities as partners

    The forthcoming NHS workforce plan must treat universities as partners

    When the NHS launched its Long-Term Workforce Plan in 2023, it set out an ambitious vision: to nearly double the number of doctors and nurses through the first fully comprehensive national workforce strategy in its history. For universities (the institutions responsible for training these professionals) it offered rare clarity. Yet without a clear funding and implementation framework, progress quickly stalled.

    Two years on, that ambition has not only faltered but, in some respects, reversed. Both universities and NHS trusts face severe financial pressures: universities are cutting courses and staff, while trusts reduce job vacancies and apprenticeships. Meanwhile, universities remain excluded from decisions shaping the future workforce.

    Although Labour supported the Conservatives’ plan while in opposition, in office it has taken a different approach. The NHS 10-year plan, published last June, gave limited attention to workforce issues.

    With the government committed to reducing net migration, boosting homegrown staff remains a priority, though now on a smaller scale. An entirely new workforce plan is expected in the spring, envisaging fewer staff – but with better conditions and “more exciting roles”. In the meantime, a radical change in the relationship between the NHS and higher education is needed.

    Contradictions

    Alliance universities educate a third of England’s nurses, a significant share of allied health professionals, and a growing number of doctors. We’re innovating and collaborating on degree apprenticeships, opening medical schools and creating new pathways into health careers. Yet as with the previous long-term workforce plan, universities have barely been consulted – despite being central to delivering the workforce the NHS needs.” The recent call for evidence on the forthcoming plan didn’t mention universities once.

    That is why key bodies representing healthcare educators recently sent a joint letter to health ministers calling for education, training, and research to be at the heart of the 10-year workforce plan. We are asking for a cross-government taskforce to coordinate efforts on student recruitment, retention, clinical placement capacity, and planning. These systematic issues are at the heart of the NHS workforce crisis – not poor-quality education and training.

    Universities can help scale solutions, but only if government stops pulling policy levers in opposite directions. These contradictions undermine progress: the Department for Education’s decision to scrap level 7 apprenticeship funding directly conflicts with the NHS’ emphasis on advanced practice. Add to that the patchy engagement of Integrated Care Systems with educators, leaving universities uncertain about their role in local workforce planning.

    Despite these mixed signals, universities continue to devise innovative approaches. At Oxford Brookes, the School of Nursing and Midwifery operates as a joint venture with two NHS trusts, sharing leadership and strategic planning to align education with workforce needs. In North Central London, Middlesex University works with the Integrated Care Board to raise the profile of nursing in social care, providing bespoke training that has cut A&E admissions from care homes. These partnerships show what’s possible when universities are treated as equal partners, aligning education with workforce needs and improving patient outcomes.

    Joint work on the pipeline

    But innovation alone can’t compensate for a shrinking recruitment pipeline, which is still largely unaddressed by policymakers. Nursing applications have fallen post-Covid and in the wake of the cost-of-living crisis. Attrition figures often mislead: many students do not drop out but delay completion due to life pressures – financial strain, caring responsibilities, and mental health challenges. Intensive placements leave little room for paid work, compounding these pressures. University Alliance supports the RCN’s proposal for a loan forgiveness scheme in exchange for time served and an uprated learning support fund to keep students in training.

    If we want a future-ready nursing and midwifery workforce, we need to ditch the outdated obsession with counting hours and start focusing on outcomes. The NMC will soon be consulting to reduce its requirements from 4,600 to 3,600 programme hours, which is a small step in the right direction.

    The pandemic showed what’s possible when regulators embrace flexibility. Emergency standards unlocked innovation in simulation and digital training. Today, Alliance universities use augmented reality mannequins and advanced simulation suites to replicate hospital and home-care settings – boosting confidence and easing placement pressures. Scaling these solutions, however, requires capital investment and regulatory reform – neither of which is happening fast enough.

    Flexibility isn’t just about training hours – it’s about pathways too. Degree apprenticeships have been one of the NHS’s success stories, creating alternative routes into nursing and allied health professions. However, without attention, the NHS risks losing one of its most flexible entry points into the profession.

    Social Market Foundation research found that intensive inspection regimes, audits and reporting processes from multiple oversight bodies are driving up costs and leading to some universities leaving the market. Some successful programmes have been paused because employers can’t afford backfill costs. Anglia Ruskin University developed the UK’s first medical doctor degree apprenticeship to tackle shortages in rural communities at considerable cost – only for the level 7 funding decision to slam the brakes on expansion.

    Long-term ambitions

    Finally, if the NHS is to move beyond a hospital-centric model – a long-term government ambition – universities must help drive that change. The infrastructure to support the shift to community care has been hollowed out over decades.

    Alliance universities are piloting community nursing pathways, increasingly arranging placements in primary care and social care settings. But growth is significantly hampered by a shortage of community staff able to supervise students. Without investment and clear career routes, graduates will continue to gravitate toward acute settings, and the vision of neighbourhood care will remain a mirage.

    The next workforce plan is a chance to break the cycle of short-term fixes and build a sustainable system. That means joining-up health and education policy, embracing regulatory flexibility, and investing in the infrastructure that enables transformation. Above all, it means treating universities as strategic partners. Without these measures, ambitions for a homegrown, future-ready workforce will remain out of reach.

    Source link

  • How Japan and India will shape the next decade’s workforce

    How Japan and India will shape the next decade’s workforce

    Japan and India are entering a new phase of partnership, built not on formal communiqués but on the steady movement of people. Though they speak different languages, both share respect, reliability, and a quiet focus on getting things done, setting the tone for success.

    Japan today is facing a demographic shift that’s changing its economy and workforce, with labour shortages affecting everything from technology and healthcare to manufacturing, construction, and advanced engineering.

    In response, the Japanese government has introduced new pathways, including the SSW visa, more English-taught university programs, and stronger internationalisation policies led by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT).

    While Japan has been actively reaching out to other countries for skilled talent, India is uniquely positioned to be the partner to bridge the gap at scale.

    India, with its young, skilled, and increasingly global talent pool, is emerging as a natural partner to Japan. With the world’s largest youth population and a fast-growing base of STEM-trained graduates, India has the scale and capacity to make the goal of 500,000 Indian professionals working in Japan by 2030 realistic.

    Against this backdrop, Japan and India are helping convert intent into outcomes by building a three-pillared, structured talent mobility bridge that works across the full continuum — from early awareness in schools to education, language acquisition, and workforce readiness — addressing the real frictions that often slow cross-border mobility.

    Through Japanese language labs embedded in Indian schools and institutions, students are developing linguistic and cultural fluency early, reframing Japanese not as a barrier but as a long-term enabler.

    This ecosystem approach is reinforced through joint initiatives with the Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO), which provides critical institutional linkage to Japan’s evolving workforce needs, and through the digital platform Navi Japan, the official platform for Study in Japan from South Asia. Together, these efforts are helping align India’s scale of talent with Japan’s demand, making mobility not episodic, but systemic and sustainable.

    Moreover, in the last 11 months, interest in Japan is rising sharply among young Indians. Over 25,000 students have engaged with study-in-Japan initiatives through webinars, school interactions, and fairs, reaching more than 1,000 schools across 123 cities, from Tier 1 to Tier 3 locations. This early-stage outreach is vital to building the pipeline that will support Japan’s goal of welcoming half a million Indian professionals.

    In just two months, Navi Japan attracted over 12,000 users, 11,000 of them from India, generating more than 125,000 engagements. These aren’t casual clicks — students are spending close to three minutes per visit, actively exploring degree programs, scholarships, English-taught options, and guidance on living costs, showing serious consideration.

    What they’re searching for is just as telling: business programs top the list with more than 10,000 searches, followed by STEM at over 9,000, strong interest in AI and machine learning with more than 7,300 searches, and thousands more in robotics, computer science, and economics. These are exactly the skills Japan needs most, clearly showing how closely Indian student demand aligns with Japan’s workforce priorities.

    What’s equally interesting is where this interest is coming from. While cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Kolkata remain highly active, momentum is quickly spreading beyond the major metros.

    Education isn’t just about earning a degree; it is the most reliable pathway to long-term workforce integration

    Students from cities such as Indore, Lucknow, and Bhopal are appearing in growing numbers, with engagement now seen across 142 cities in India — full coverage in Tier 1, around 50% in Tier 2, and a growing 20% in Tier 3. Students outside major cities increasingly see Japan as a realistic, future-focused option for education and upward mobility.

    This is why student mobility has emerged as the real engine of the Japan-India relationship. Education isn’t just about earning a degree; it is the most reliable pathway to long-term workforce integration. Students who study in Japan gain more than academic knowledge — they absorb the culture, expectations, and work ethic — leaving them better placed to meet language requirements, qualify for SSW pathways, and move into the specialised roles where Japan’s talent shortages are most acute.

    A critical part of this is what happens after education and how students move from the classroom into the workplace. Skills-focused initiatives are helping students prepare for Japan’s workforce through practical, Japan-relevant problem-solving, including programs such as the TechBridge challenge, which introduces learners to real-world domains and early exposure to Japan. These efforts connect education, skills, and career pathways seamlessly.

    Both nations stand to gain considerably from the deepening of this mobility corridor. Japan secures the skilled workforce it urgently needs to sustain its economy, while India gains new avenues for global employment, technical upskilling and international collaboration.

    If current momentum continues, the prospect of 500,000 Indian professionals working in Japan by 2030 is not only achievable but transformative. The real story, however, is not about numbers, it is about two nations building a long-term, mutually beneficial partnership anchored in talent, education, and opportunity.

    There is a mobility anecdote that I love sharing. Indians grow up using Suzuki vehicles, listening to Sony music systems, or working with Panasonic technologies and yet few consciously think of them as Japanese; they are simply familiar and reliable, and that’s a powerful lesson for talent mobility.

    When people move not as outsiders, but, as trusted contributors, integration becomes natural rather than negotiated, and that’s when mobility stops being a policy goal and becomes a lived reality.

    Source link

  • Data Shows AI “Disconnect” in Higher Ed Workforce

    Data Shows AI “Disconnect” in Higher Ed Workforce

    Nearly half of higher ed workers feel a mix of caution and enthusiasm about AI.

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | hoozone and PhonlamaiPhoto/iStock/Getty Images | skynesher/E+/Getty Images

    New data shows that while 94 percent of higher education workers use AI tools, only 54 percent are aware of their institution’s AI use policies and guidelines. And even when colleges and universities have transparent policies in place, only about half of employees feel confident about using AI tools for work.

    “[That disconnect] could have implications for things like data privacy and security and other data governance issues that protect the institution and [its] data users,” Jenay Robert, senior researcher at Educause and author of “The Impact of AI on Work in Higher Education,” said on a recorded video message about the report. Educause published the findings Monday in partnership with the National Association of College and University Business Officers, the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources and the Association for Institutional Research.

    In the fall, roughly three years after generative artificial intelligence tools went mainstream and some higher education institutions began partnering with tech companies, researchers surveyed 1,960 staff, administrators and faculty across more than 1,800 public and private institutions about AI’s relationship to their work. Ninety-two percent of respondents said their institution has a work-related AI strategy—which includes piloting AI tools, evaluating both opportunities and risks and encouraging use of AI tools. And while the vast majority of respondents (89 percent) said they aren’t required to use AI tools for work, 86 percent said they want to or will continue to use AI tools in the future.

    But the report also reveals concerns about AI’s integration into the campus workplace, and shows that not every worker is on the same page regarding which tools to implement and how.

    For example, 56 percent of respondents reported using AI tools that are not provided by their institutions for work-related tasks. Additionally, 38 percent of executive leaders, 43 percent of managers and directors, 35 percent of technology professionals and 30 percent of cybersecurity and privacy professionals reported that they are not aware of policies designed to guide their work-related use of AI tools.

    “Given that institutional leaders and IT professionals are the two groups of stakeholders most likely to have decision-making authority for work-related AI policies/guidelines, the data suggest that many institutions may simply lack formal policies/guidelines, rather than indicating insufficient communication about policies,” Robert wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed.

    And even if they are aware of AI use policies, most workers still don’t know whether to fear or embrace AI.

    The majority of respondents (81 percent) expressed at least some enthusiasm about AI, with 33 percent reporting that they were “very enthusiastic/enthusiastic” and 48 percent reporting a mix of “caution and enthusiasm.” Meanwhile, 17 percent said they were “very cautious/cautious” about it.

    The survey yielded a similar breakdown of responses to questions about impressions of institutional leaders’ attitudes toward AI: 38 percent said they thought their leaders were “very enthusiastic/enthusiastic”; 15 percent said they were “very cautious/cautious” about it, and 36 percent said their leaders express a mix of “caution and enthusiasm.”

    But Kevin McClure, chair of the department of educational leadership at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, told Inside Higher Ed that embrace of AI may be skewed. That’s because only 12 percent of the survey’s respondents were faculty, whereas the rest held staff, management or executive roles.

    “This survey was also sent to institutional researchers and people affiliated with human resources,” he said. “Those people are working in the realm of technology, processing forms, paperwork data analysis and filing reports.”

    And the framing of the report’s questions about workers’ levels of caution and enthusiasm may have contributed to the elevated excitement about AI captured in the report, McClure added.

    So many people said they share a mix of caution and enthusiasm “because that was one of the choices,” he said. “To me, it reads like people are feeling it out—they can see the use cases for AI but also have concerns. That gets washed out by combining it with enthusiasm.”

    Risks and Rewards

    Nonetheless, that mix of caution and enthusiasm stems from the risks and benefits higher education workers associate with AI.

    Sixty-seven percent of respondents identified six or more “urgent” AI-related risks, including an increase in misinformation, the use of data without consent, loss of fundamental skills requiring independent thought, student AI use outpacing faculty and staff AI skills, and job loss. Some of those concerns align with the findings of Inside Higher Ed’s own surveys of provosts and chief technology officers, which found that the majority of both groups believe AI is a moderate or serious risk to academic integrity.

    “Almost more important than the specific risks that people are pointing out is the number of risks that people are pointing out,” Robert, the report’s author, said. “This really validates the feeling that we’re all having about AI when it comes to this feeling of overwhelm that there really are a lot of things to pay attention to.”

    At the same time, 67 percent of respondents to the Educause survey identified five or more AI-related opportunities as “most promising,” including automating repetitive processes, offloading administrative burdens and mundane tasks, and analyzing large datasets.

    “A lot of people want tools that will simplify the [administrative burden] of higher ed. Not a lot of that is going to save a ton of time or money. It’s just going to be less of an annoyance for the average worker,” McClure said. “That suggests that people aren’t looking for something that’s going to transform the workplace; they just want some assistance with the more annoying tasks.”

    And according to the report, most colleges don’t know how efficient those tools are: Just 13 percent of respondents said their institution is measuring the return on investment (ROI) for work-related AI tools.

    “Measuring the ROI of specific technologies is challenging, and this is likely one of the biggest reasons we see this gap between adoption and measurement,” Robert said. “As higher education technology leaders consider longer term investments, ROI is becoming a more pressing issue.”

    Source link

  • A new approach to driving STEM workforce readiness

    A new approach to driving STEM workforce readiness

    Key points:

    STEM workforce shortages are a well-known global issue. With demand set to rise by nearly 11 percent in the next decade, today’s students are the solution. They will be the ones to make the next big discoveries, solve the next great challenges, and make the world a better place.

    Unfortunately, many students don’t see themselves as part of that picture.

    When students struggle in math and science, many come to believe they simply aren’t “STEM people.” While it’s common to hear this phrase in the classroom, a perceived inability in STEM can become a gatekeeper that stops students from pursuing STEM careers and alters the entire trajectory of their lives. Because of this, educators must confront negative STEM identities head on.

    One promising approach is to teach decision-making and critical thinking directly within STEM classrooms, equipping students with the durable skills essential for future careers and the mindset that they can decide on a STEM career for themselves.

    Teaching decision-making

    Many educators assume this strategy requires a full curriculum overhaul. Rather, decision-making can be taught by weaving decision science theories and concepts into existing lesson plans. This teaching and learning of skillful judgment formation and decision-making is called Decision Education. 

    There are four main learning domains of Decision Education as outlined in the Decision Education K-12 Learning Standards: thinking probabilistically, valuing and applying rationality, recognizing and resisting cognitive biases, and structuring decisions. Taken together, these skills, among other things, help students gather and assess information, consider different perspectives, evaluate risks and apply knowledge in real-world scenarios. 

    The intersection of Decision Education and STEM

    Decision Education touches on many of the core skills that STEM requires, such as applying a scientific mindset, collaboration, problem-solving, and critical thinking. This approach opens new pathways for students to engage with STEM in ways that align with their interests, strengths, and learning styles.

    Decision Education hones the durable skills students need to succeed both in and out of the STEM classroom. For example, “weight-and-rate” tables can help high school students evaluate college decisions by comparing elements like tuition, academic programs, and distance from home. While the content in this exercise is personalized and practical for each student, it’s grounded in analytical thinking, helping them learn to follow a structured decision process, think probabilistically, recognize cognitive biases, and apply rational reasoning.

    These same decision-making skills mirror the core practices of STEM. Math, science, and engineering require students to weigh variables, assess risk, and model potential outcomes. While those concepts may feel abstract within the context of STEM, applying them to real-life choices helps students see these skills as powerful tools for navigating uncertainty in their daily lives.

    Decision Education also strengthens cognitive flexibility, helping students recognize biases, question assumptions, and consider different perspectives. Building these habits is crucial for scientific thinking, where testing hypotheses, evaluating evidence objectively, and revising conclusions based on new data are all part of the process. The scientific method itself applies several core Decision Education concepts.

    As students build critical thinking and collaboration skills, they also deepen their self-awareness, which can be transformative for those who do not see themselves as “STEM people.” For example, a student drawn to literacy might find it helpful to reimagine math and science as languages built on patterns, symbols, and structured communication. By connecting STEM to existing strengths, educators can help reshape perceptions and unlock potential.

    Adopting new strategies

    As educators seek to develop or enhance STEM education and cultures in their schools, districts and administrators must consider teacher training and support.

    High-quality professional development programs are an effective way to help teachers hone the durable skills they aim to cultivate in their students. Effective training also creates space for educators to reflect on how unconscious biases might shape their perceptions of who belongs in advanced STEM coursework. Addressing these patterns allows teachers to see students more clearly, strengthen empathy, and create deeper connections in the classroom.

    When educators come together to make STEM more engaging and accessible, they do more than teach content: they rewrite the narrative about who can succeed in STEM. By integrating Decision Education as a skill-building bridge between STEM and students’ everyday lives, educators can foster confidence, curiosity, and a sense of belonging, which helps learners build their own STEM identity, keeping them invested and motivated to learn. While not every student will ultimately pursue a career in STEM, they can leave the classroom with stronger critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making skills that will serve them for life.

    Creating that kind of learning environment takes intention, shared commitment, and a belief that every student deserves meaningful access to and engagement with STEM. But when the opportunity arises, the right decision is clear–and every school has the power to make it.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Three Promising Practices to Engage a New Workforce – The 74

    Three Promising Practices to Engage a New Workforce – The 74


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

    Right now, tomorrow’s workforce is on TikTok and Instagram, looking at “influencer” or “crypto genius” as an exciting career option — not so different, really, from a previous generation wanting to be a pop star or win Shark Tank.

    Like those old-school dream gigs, today’s hot online careers are mostly unattainable and unstable. For some young people, they’re also a capitulation: “My job feels like a dead end and business school isn’t in my future. Maybe people will watch me unbox purchases.”

    The next generation, a huge reservoir of talent, is rarely challenged to set a higher bar — and they get a lot more advice about building a personal brand than about building a career. Those of us leading organizations owe it to them to demystify professions and create new pathways.

    Here are three promising practices for the new workforce, especially for young people without traditional access: intensive mentoring, cross-organizational cohorts, and early experiences with professional environments.

    Mentoring

    The traditional approach to mentoring is the “old boy network.” Since the 1990s, more workers have also benefited from informal networks such as alumni associations or sometimes nonprofits that serve this purpose. However, young people may need more formal mentoring within the workplace to thrive and persist.

    Many companies assign mentors to brand new employees, but not generally for the long term. The next generation needs ongoing mentoring. First-gen professionals, especially, can find it difficult to seek guidance. They may not want to appear vulnerable; they may not know what they don’t know. Online courses — valuable for a population that has grown up watching videos — can help. But there are a million; which ones are useful? And perhaps the new employee fears being caught trying to learn their job. To address such needs, they need more than a mentor. They need a navigator.

    Beyond knowledge gaps, some young employees also need help with organizational culture. I know a recent college graduate in a start-up job where colleagues regularly drink at work. She felt she had to participate to be taken seriously. Some other, more senior colleagues who had opted out could have helped her find another way to engage. It’s on us to assist young coworkers struggling with fit.

    These new members of the workforce also need encouragement to find ongoing mentoring and keep seeking engagement. For many of them, an elevator ride with the CEO would be a terrifying moment, rather than an opportunity. A lack of guidance leads to frustration, and ultimately nonpersistence.

    Cohorts

    It doesn’t always take a senior person to help a new employee navigate. Peer cohorts can also help. Most young workers are already comfortable traveling in packs socially. An ongoing professional conversation with their peers can benefit both them and the company, and shared responsibility for problem-solving can be liberating. Women in particular have a stereotypical but real inclination to be useful, and they are more apt to receive if they can also give. Cohorts offer a way to do that.

    Even for midlevel employees, there is value in connecting across silos. I know one organization where colleagues from different departments meet monthly to catch up on their work. Individuals offer each other expertise, and departments pitch in together, which creates efficiencies.

    Engaging like this especially helps employees who are more reticent. Helping as well as being helped creates social glue — and it can also build organizational loyalty, as employees see themselves in a bigger picture.

    Early exposure

    “Summer camp” experiences on college campuses are a common way to create access and persistence for first-generation students. When middle schoolers visit campuses, they can imagine college life. Similarly, Take Your Child to Work Day has, since the 1990s, offered glimpses of the working world—at least, for children of white-collar professionals.

    But when parents work in a meatpacking plant, their children have no opportunity to get to know office culture. More and more next-gen workers lack a vision of how to belong in a corporate or institutional setting. Yet that is the most powerful element: the vision of oneself in a new context, and permission to be there.

    To get the farm team ready and overcome the sense of “not for me,” employers must invite them in early. Google, for example, invites school groups to its campus. If these young people eventually land an interview, the campus already feels familiar.

    If these promising practices seem self-evident to you, consider where you learned about your work environment. If the answer is “in college” or “from relatives,” you might ask: Who in my workforce did not get that experience? And if the answer is “I learned the hard way,” can you help someone else not to have to learn the hard way, too? 


    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

  • OPINION: Workforce Pell can lead to good jobs for students if they get the support needed for long-term success

    OPINION: Workforce Pell can lead to good jobs for students if they get the support needed for long-term success

    by Alexander Mayer, The Hechinger Report
    December 16, 2025

    Ohio resident Megan Cutright lost her hospitality job during the pandemic. At her daughter’s urging, she found her way to Lorain County Community College in Ohio and onto a new career path.  

    Community colleges will soon have a new opportunity to help more students like Megan achieve their career goals. Starting next summer, federal funds will be available through a program known as Workforce Pell, which extends federal aid to career-focused education and training programs that last between eight and 15 weeks. 

    Members of Congress advocating for Pell Grants to cover shorter programs have consistently highlighted Workforce Pell’s potential, noting that the extension will lead to “good-paying jobs.”  

    That could happen. But it will only happen if states and colleges thoughtfully consider the supports students need for success.  

    This is important, because helping students pay for workforce programs is not enough. They also need support and wraparound services, much like the kind Megan was offered at Lorain, where her program followed an evidence-based model known as ASAP that assigns each student a career adviser. 

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

    Megan’s adviser “helped me from day one,” she said, in a story posted on the college’s website. “I told her I was interested in the radiologic technology program but that I had no idea where to start. We just did everything together.”  

    Megan went on to secure a job as an assistant in the radiology department at her local hospital, where she had interned as a student. She knew what steps she needed to take because her community college supported and advised her, using an evidence-backed practice, illustrating something we have learned from the experience of the community colleges that use the ASAP model: Support is invaluable.  

    Megan also knew that her path to a full-time position in radiologic technology required her to pass a licensure test — scheduled for four days after graduation.  

    The students who will enroll in Workforce Pell programs deserve the same careful attention. To ensure that Workforce Pell is effective for students, we should follow the same three critical steps that helped drive the expansion of ASAP and brought it to Megan’s college: (1) experiment to see what works, (2) collect and follow the data and (3) ensure that colleges learn from each other to apply what works. 

    Before ASAP was developed, the higher education community had some ideas about what might work to help students complete their degrees and get good jobs. When colleges and researchers worked together to test these ideas and gathered reliable data, though, they learned that those strategies only helped students at the margins. 

    There was no solid evidence about what worked to make big, lasting improvements in college completion until the City University of New York (CUNY) worked with researchers at MDRC to test ASAP and its combination of longer-lasting strategies. They kept a close eye on the data and learned that while some strategies didn’t produce big effects on their own, the combined ASAP approach resulted in significant improvements in student outcomes, nearly doubling the three-year college completion rate.  

    CUNY and MDRC shared what they learned with higher education leaders and policymakers, inspiring other community colleges to try out the model. Those colleges started seeing results too, and the model kept spreading. Today, ASAP is used in more than 50 colleges in seven states. And it’s paying off — in Ohio, for example, students who received ASAP services ended up earning significantly more than those who did not. 

    That same experimentation and learning mindset will be needed for Workforce Pell, because while short-term training can lead to good careers, it’s far from guaranteed.  

    For example, phlebotomy technician programs are popular, but without additional training or credentials they often don’t lead to jobs that pay well. Similarly, students who complete short-term programs in information technology, welding and construction-related skills can continue to acquire stackable credentials that substantially increase their earning potential, although that also doesn’t happen automatically. The complexity of the credentialing marketplace can make it impossible for students and families to assess programs and make good decisions without help.  

    Related: OPINION: Too many college graduates are stranded before their careers can even begin. We can’t let that happen 

    A big question for Workforce Pell will be how to make sure students understand how to get onto a career path and continue advancing their wider career aspirations. Workforce Pell grants are designed to help students with low incomes overcome financial barriers, but these same students often face other barriers.  

    That’s why colleges should experiment with supports like career advising to help students identify stepping-stones to a good career, along with placement services to help them navigate the job market. In addition, states must expand their data collection efforts to formally include noncredit programs. Some, including Iowa, Louisiana and Virginia, have already made considerable progress linking their education and workforce systems.  

    Offering student support services and setting up data systems requires resources, but Workforce Pell will bring new funds to states and colleges that are currently financing job training programs. Philanthropy can also help by providing resources to test out what works best to get students through short-term programs and onto solid career paths.  

    Sharing what works — and what doesn’t — will be critical to the success of Workforce Pell in the long-term. The same spirit of learning that fueled innovation around the ASAP model should be embedded in Workforce Pell from the start.  

    Alexander Mayer is director of postsecondary education at MDRC, the nonprofit research association. 

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected]. 

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

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-workforce-pell-can-lead-to-good-jobs-for-students-if-they-get-the-support-needed-for-long-term-success/”>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=113877&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-workforce-pell-can-lead-to-good-jobs-for-students-if-they-get-the-support-needed-for-long-term-success/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • Modernizing the special education workforce is a national imperative

    Modernizing the special education workforce is a national imperative

    Key points:

    America’s special education system is facing a slow-motion collapse. Nearly 8 million students now receive services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), but the number of qualified teachers and related service providers continues to shrink. Districts from California to Maine report the same story: unfilled positions, overworked staff, and students missing the services they’re legally entitled to receive.

    “The promise of IDEA means little if there’s no one left to deliver it.”

    The data tell a clear story. Since 2013, the number of children ages 3–21 served under IDEA has grown from 6.4 million to roughly 7.5 million. Yet the teacher pipeline has moved in the opposite direction. According to Title II reports, teacher-preparation enrollments dropped 6 percent over the last decade and program completions plunged 27 percent. At the same time, nearly half of special educators leave the field within their first five years.

    By 2023, 45 percent of public schools were operating without a full teaching staff. Vacancies were most acute in special education. Attrition, burnout, and early retirements outpace new entrants by a wide margin.

    Why the traditional model no longer works

    For decades, schools and staffing firms have fought over the same dwindling pool of licensed providers. Recruiting cycles stretch for months, while students wait for evaluations, therapies, or IEP services.

    Traditional staffing firms focus on long-term contracts lasting six months or more, which makes sense for stability, but ignores an enormous, untapped workforce: thousands of credentialed professionals who could contribute a few extra hours each week if the system made it easy.

    Meanwhile, the process of credentialing, vetting, and matching candidates remains slow and manual, reliant on spreadsheets, email, and recruiters juggling dozens of openings. The result is predictable: delayed assessments, compliance risk, and burned-out staff covering for unfilled roles.

    “Districts and recruiters compete for the same people, when they could be expanding the pool instead.”

    The hidden workforce hiding in plain sight

    Across the country, tens of thousands of licensed professionals–speech-language pathologists, occupational therapists, school psychologists, special educators–are under-employed. Many have stepped back from full-time work to care for families or pursue private practice. Others left the classroom but still want to contribute.

    Imagine if districts could tap those “extra hours” through a vetted, AI-powered marketplace. A system that matched real-time school requests with qualified providers in their state. A model like this wouldn’t replace full-time roles; it would expand capacity, reduce burnout, and bring talent back into the system.

    This isn’t theoretical. The same “on-demand” concept has already modernized industries from medicine to media. Education is long overdue for the same reinvention.

    What modernization looks like

    1. AI-driven matching: Districts post specific service needs (evaluations, IEP meetings, therapy hours). Licensed providers choose opportunities that fit their schedule.
    2. Verified credentials and provider profiles: Platforms integrate state licensure databases and background checks to ensure compliance and provide profiles with all candidate information including on-demand, video interviews so schools can make informed hiring decisions immediately.
    3. Smart staffing metrics: Schools track fill-rates, provider utilization, and service delays in real time.
    4. Integrated workflows: The system plugs into existing special education management tools. No new learning curve for administrators.

    A moment of urgency

    The shortage isn’t just inconvenient; it’s systemic. Each unfilled position represents students who lose therapy hours, districts risking due-process complaints, and educators pushed closer to burnout.

    With IDEA students now representing nearly 15 percent of all public school enrollment, the nation can’t afford to let a twentieth-century staffing model dictate twenty-first-century outcomes.

    We have the technology. We have the workforce. What we need is the will to connect them.

    “Modernizing special education staffing isn’t innovation for innovation’s sake, it’s survival.”

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Education Department outlines potential Workforce Pell regulations

    Education Department outlines potential Workforce Pell regulations

    The U.S. Department of Education recently released a draft proposal of regulatory language that outlines how short-term programs could become — and remain — eligible for the newly created Workforce Pell Grants. 

    The Workforce Pell program will allow students in programs as short as eight weeks to receive Pell Grants. It was created as part of the massive spending and tax package that Republicans passed this summer and takes effect in July 2026. 

    The Education Department released the draft proposal ahead of negotiations next week to hash out the regulatory language governing how the program will operate. 

    In a process known as negotiated rulemaking, stakeholders representing different groups affected by the regulations are to meet Monday to begin discussing the policy details of the Workforce Pell program. Participants include students, employers and college officials. 

    If they reach consensus on regulatory language, the Education Department will have to use that when formally proposing regulations for Workforce Pell. If the stakeholders don’t reach consensus, the agency will be free to write its own regulations. 

    The draft proposal outlines the steps state officials will have to take for workforce programs to begin qualifying for Workforce Pell Grants and what student outcome metrics they would need to hit to remain eligible for the grants. 

    How would programs get approved for Workforce Pell?

    The massive budget bill expands Pell Grants to certain workforce-training programs lasting between eight to 15 weeks. For programs to be eligible, governors must consult with state boards to determine if they prepare students to enroll in a related certificate or degree program, meet employers’ hiring needs, and provide training for high-skill, high-wage or in-demand occupations, among other requirements.

    Under the Education Department’s draft proposal, each state’s governor would work with its workforce development board to establish which occupations are considered high-skill, high-wage or in-demand and publicly share how the state made those determinations. Governors would also have to seek feedback from employers to develop a written policy for determining whether programs meet local hiring needs. 

    As established in the spending bill, short-term programs must then receive approval from the Education Department’s secretary before they can qualify for Workforce Pell. Under the statute, programs have to exist for at least one year before they can get approval. 

    The Education Department’s proposal adds that the secretary wouldn’t be able to approve a program until “one year after the Governor determines that the program met all applicable requirements.” 

    This means that “all programs would need to wait an additional year before becoming eligible, even if they had already existed for more than a year,” according to a Thursday analysis of the draft from James Hermes, associate vice president of government relations at the American Association of Community Colleges. 

    AACC plans to work with negotiators to push for that provision to be changed, Hermes said. 

    How will programs maintain eligibility?

    Under the Education Department’s draft language, programs would need to maintain a job placement rate of 70% to remain eligible during the first two years of the Workforce Pell program. But after the 2027-28 award year, they would need 70% of their graduates to specifically land jobs in fields for which they’re being trained, according to the proposal. 

    During each award year for Workforce Pell, the statute bars programs from posting tuition and fee prices that are higher than the “value-added” earnings of their students. It calculates that difference by subtracting 150% of the federal poverty line from the median earnings of students who completed their program three years prior. 

    Source link

  • Higher education must include valuable workforce experience and training that helps students secure meaningful jobs

    Higher education must include valuable workforce experience and training that helps students secure meaningful jobs

    by Bruno V. Manno, The Hechinger Report
    November 10, 2025

    This fall, some 19 million undergraduates returned to U.S. campuses with a long-held expectation: Graduate, land an entry-level job, climb the career ladder. That formula is breaking down.  

    Once reliable gateway jobs for college graduates in industries like finance, consulting and journalism have tightened requirements. Many entry-level job postings that previously provided initial working experience for college graduates now require two to three years of prior experience, while AI, a recent analysis concluded, “snaps up good entry-level tasks,” especially routine work like drafting memos, preparing spreadsheets and summarizing research.  

    Without these proving grounds, new hires lose chances to build skills by doing. And the demand for work experience that potential workers don’t have creates an experience gap for new job seekers. Once stepping-stones, entry-level positions increasingly resemble mid-career jobs. 

    No doubt AI is and will continue to reshape work in general and entry-level jobs in particular in expected and unexpected ways. But we are not doomed to what some call an “AI job apocalypse” or a “white-collar bloodbath” that leads to mass unemployment. There are practical solutions to the experience gap problem when it comes to education and training programs. These include earn-and-learn models and other innovative public and private employer partnerships that build into their approaches opportunities for young people to gain valuable work experience.  

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

    Before I describe these potential solutions, here is more information on how I see the problem.  

    The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reported that in March 2025, the unemployment rate for college graduates ages 22 to 27 was 5.7 percent, compared to an overall unemployment rate of 4.0 percent. Other than the temporary pandemic-related spike in 2021, that was the highest unemployment rate for new grads since 2014. More recently, the Fed’s August 2025 unemployment rate for recent college graduates was 1 percentage point higher than its overall unemployment rate of 4.3 percent.  

    The experience gap phenomenon is not limited to the tech sector. In 2019, 61 percent of AI-related job postings were in the information technology and computer science sector, with 39 percent in non-tech sectors, labor analytics from Lightcast show. By 2024, the majority (51 percent versus 49 percent) of AI-related job postings were outside the tech sector. 

    The cumulative effect of all this is apparent. The hollowing out of entry-level work stalls mobility across the labor market, leaving many college graduates stranded before their careers can even begin. Moreover, these changes cut to the core of higher education’s promise.  

    If graduates can’t secure meaningful jobs, confidence in higher ed falters — one reason why it should come as no surprise that 56 percent of Americans think earning a four-year degree is not worth the cost, a March 2023 Wall Street Journal-NORC poll found, compared with 42 percent who think it is, a new low in a poll first administered in 2013. Skepticism was predominant among those ages 18 to 34, and college degree holders were among those most skeptical.  

    Related: As more question the value of a degree, colleges fight to prove their return on investment 

    The collapse of entry-level jobs isn’t just a cyclical downturn. It’s a structural shift. Left unchecked, this dynamic will deepen inequality, slow social mobility and further undermine faith in higher education. 

    As I’ve said, solutions exist. Here are five that I believe in: 

    Apprenticeships and other earn-and-learn models: Earn-and-learn apprenticeships are a promising, direct solution to the experience gap. They combine paid work with structured training and provide years of experience to college students in those jobs. Sectors from tech to health care are experimenting with this model, examples of which include registered apprenticeships, youth apprenticeships, pre-apprenticeships and apprenticeship degrees that allow individuals to pursue a degree while they work in an apprenticeship. 

    Skills-based hiring and alternative credentials: Initiatives such as skills-first hiring by major employers like IBM, Google and Apple aim to evaluate candidates based on their competencies rather than their degrees. Microcredentials, industry certificates and portfolios can serve as verifiable signals of skills gained through alternative training routes. 

    Stronger college and employer partnerships: Colleges can (and should) embed work-based learning into curricula through co-op programs, project-based courses and partnerships with local industries. Northeastern University and Drexel have long pioneered this model. And others, such as Western Governors University and Southern New Hampshire University, are using online learning to advance this approach. Scaling this solution could help close the experience gap. 

    Policy innovations: Governments can play a role by giving incentives to companies to create early career opportunities. Workforce Pell, recently enacted in President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, expands financial aid to use for short-term training programs, opening new pathways for students who may not be pursuing traditional degrees. Tax credits for apprenticeship sponsors and funding for regional workforce hubs could further expand opportunities. 

    Reimagining internships: Expanding access to paid internships — especially for first-generation and low-income students — could democratize the attainment of experience. Philanthropies and local governments could underwrite stipends to ensure that opportunity isn’t reserved for the affluent who can afford unpaid internships or have social networks that connect them to these opportunities. 

    The challenge presented by this troubling experience gap is urgent. Today’s students deserve a college experience and a labor market in which education and effort still translate into opportunity. 

    Bruno V. Manno is a senior advisor at the Progressive Policy Institute, leading its What Works Lab, and is a former U.S. assistant secretary of education for policy.  

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected]. 

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

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-too-many-college-graduates-are-stranded-before-their-careers-can-even-begin-we-cant-let-that-happen/”>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=113298&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-too-many-college-graduates-are-stranded-before-their-careers-can-even-begin-we-cant-let-that-happen/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • Chegg slashes nearly half of its workforce as AI eats into its business

    Chegg slashes nearly half of its workforce as AI eats into its business

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Ed tech specialist Chegg is slashing 388 jobs, or about 45% of its workforce, in a massive restructuring effort expected to save up to $110 million next fiscal year, the public company said this week. 
    • The news comes as Chegg announced it will remain a standalone company following an exploration of strategic options that could have involved selling the company to new ownership or going private. 
    • The company also reshuffled its leadership. Executive Chairman Dan Rosensweig resumed the CEO role on Monday. He replaced Nathan Schultz, who had taken on the chief role from Rosenzweig in June 2024 and is remaining as an executive adviser.

    Dive Insight:

    Chegg pegged its mass layoffs to a change in how it operates its academic learning products, which include online homework and study help, textbook rental and proofreading services, among others. The company also highlighted its investment in artificial intelligence, which it has integrated into products such as its language-learning tools.

    As it restructures, Chegg plans to refocus around its business-to-business skills courses in professional language-learning, workplace readiness and A, which executives expect to collectively generate $70 million in revenue for fiscal 2025 and to grow in double digits next year. This new focus will set up Chegg for sustainable revenue and earnings growth, the company said.

    For now, the company is racing to cut costs as it bleeds subscribers and money. In the second quarter, Chegg’s revenue plummeted by more than a third, to $105.1 million, which came on top of similar declines in Q1.

    Chegg has named Google as the source of many of its woes — specifically the search giant’s artificial intelligence summaries, which led to a sharp decrease in Chegg’s traffic.

    In February, Schultz announced that Chegg filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google and that it was exploring its strategic alternatives to remaining a standalone publicly traded company.

    “These two actions are connected, as we would not need to review strategic alternatives if Google hadn’t launched AI Overviews,” Schultz said then. “Unfortunately, traffic is being blocked from ever coming to Chegg because of Google’s AIO and their use of Chegg’s content to keep visitors on their own platform.”

    In its complaint against Google, Chegg said it gains most of its subscribers through students searching for answers to their study questions on Google. “Chegg thus depends on referrals from Google’s monopoly search engine for a large portion of the revenue that it devotes to producing original online content,” it said. 

    Chegg alleged that Google has leveraged its massive market share in internet searches to “coerce online publishers like Chegg to supply content that Google republishes without permission in AI-generated answers that unfairly compete for the attention of users.”

    Google has moved to dismiss the case. The tech giant argued that it has tailored its AI Overview to best serve consumers and learners, and that Chegg’s revenue struggles are its own. 

    “Instead of competing more effectively, it seeks to blame Google for its business decline,” Google responded in a May court filing. “Chegg’s grab bag of obscure legal theories in support of this effort not only are not cognizable under the antitrust laws, but run directly afoul of those laws.”

    While Chegg looked at possible financial alternatives to going it alone, it ended the process as it began: as a standalone company, for now. 

    “After thoughtful consideration of multiple proposals, the Board unanimously determined that remaining an independent public company offers the best opportunity to maximize long-term shareholder value,” the company said Monday.

    Source link