Latest news with #AmericanCouncilonEducation
Boston Globe
2 days ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Can the Ivy League band together to fight Trump's attacks on higher education?
Harvard University has suffered most of President Trump's blows, with the president stripping Advertisement At other schools, university presidents are giving interviews and campus speeches critical of the White House. Professors are unionizing to advocate for their research and students. And many alumni groups are spearheading public awareness campaigns to pressure their alma maters to fight back against Trump. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Because 'The fight is going to be won among the public,' said Jon Fansmith, vice president of the nonprofit American Council on Education. The Trump administration has arguied elite universities force-feed students leftist ideology and allowed antisemitism to run rampant since the Israel-Hamas war began in October 2023. The administration has announced investigations of colleges and universities allegedly discriminating against white people and cut off or threatened to cut federal funding to many schools. Advertisement At Columbia University, leaders in March said they would comply with the administration's demands after officials froze hundreds of millions of dollars in funding because the administration said the school failed to protect Jewish students from discrimination. But that didn't seem to appease the White House, which announced last week it was targeting the school's accreditation, which could ultimately result in Columbia losing federal financial aid for its students. In April, several Big Ten conference schools formally signed on to a 'The Trump administration has no intention of backing down, and the only thing that will work to oppose him is strong collective action where we have each other's backs,' said Lieberwitz, whose university had Students on the campus at Princeton University in Princeton, N.J., on March 7. HANNAH BEIER/NYT University presidents speak out Ivy League university presidents have responded differently to allegations of antisemitism on campus and the Trump administration's attempts to control how they run their schools. A Eisgruber, a constitutional law scholar, has been particularly outspoken, slamming Advertisement 'It's really important for conservative views to be welcome on a campus, but that's different from insisting on ideological balance on a campus,' Eisgruber told the host of The Daily this spring. After Harvard lost billions in science funding in April, Eisgruber posted 'Princeton stands with Harvard,' on his LinkedIn profile. At Brown University, the school's highest governing body recently extended president Christina Paxson's term through June 2028 in a show of confidence. Eisgruber's and Paxson's long tenures put them in better positions to speak out, higher education advocates told the Globe this spring. Other Ivies have recently been plagued by turnover among leaders, including high-profile oustings over responses to pro-Palestinian protests and allegations of antisemitism. The presidents of Yale, Cornell, and the University of Pennsylvania were installed this spring. 'The other university presidents are not standing up for Harvard because they don't want to be the next one on Trump's list,' said Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Presidents, a union. University presidents are also strategizing with lawmakers in Washington D.C., professors told the Globe. The largest public outcry from university presidents came on April 22, when hundreds signed a public statement with the American Association of Colleges & Universities against 'unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education.' Dartmouth president Sian Beilock was the only Ivy president to not sign, despite being urged to by professors and alumni, said Derek Jennings, an active member of the Native American Alumni Association of Dartmouth. The school's director of media relations, Jana Barnello, said like other schools, Dartmouth has filed supporting declarations in lawsuits over the funding cuts. Advertisement Professors rally to organize against Trump While university presidents seem to be taking a more careful and calculated approach, many professors rapidly organized this spring, forming union chapters in an attempt to defend their research. 'The level of increased faculty activism at Dartmouth is demonstrating that those of us who value the ideals and values of higher education are not waiting for administrators to lead on this,' said Bethany Moreton, who helped launch Dartmouth's chapter of the American Association of University Presidents in May 2024. Membership has since ballooned to 150, she said. Across the Ivy League, researchers said they're best suited to publicly advocate for their work, describing their life-saving findings and discoveries at rallies and in letters to lawmakers, groups told the Globe. While some observers warn of a potential brain drain among professors to Canada or Europe in response to Trump's cuts to research funding, some said Trump's attacks are creating more unity among colleagues than they've seen in years. 'If the intention was to divide faculty and pit us against each other with all the threats, it's really not working,' said Princeton English professor Meredith Martin. 'We care so much about our students that, if anything, this is bringing us together and making us stronger.' During the recent school year, membership in AAUP surged to 50,000, from 42,000, with almost all of that after Trump's inauguration in January, according to the group, and is the largest spike since its founding a century ago. Alumni stand up for schools Alumni are also pushing administrators at their alma maters to do more to stand up for their schools' autonomy. Harvard's alumni campaign, Crimson Courage, met Friday in a packed auditorium on the Cambridge campus to discuss how it is 'reaching out beyond Harvard to build the campaign,' an event description said. Advertisement The group Stand Up for Princeton and Higher Education amassed more than 9,000 alumni supporters in the past five weeks. Some held signs and wore buttons while walking the P-rade route on May 24. The group's In Connecticut, the group Stand Up for Yale sent a Similar alumni groups are taking shape across the Ivy League, with several urging university presidents to sign on to group statements, alumni told the Globe. Schools must band together formally, experts say Many graduates said their support is for all of higher education, not just their alma maters. At the recent Princeton reunion after the P-rade, a Yale Divinity School student caught up with a University of Chicago Law School graduate over barbecue. Outside nearby Firestone Library, recent graduates of Yale's and Harvard's law schools enveloped in hugs. 'The education my peers and I received was life changing, and our schools know this and are not backing down on ensuring future students get the same opportunities,' said Joshua Faires, who has an undergraduate degree from Princeton and a master's degree in sociology from Columbia University. HoSang, from Yale's AAUP chapter, said Trump knows higher education institutions depend on each other and share one 'ecosystem,' and so a threat against one is a threat to all, he said. Advertisement 'There is no saving Yale, Harvard, or Princeton without standing up for all of higher education,' HoSang said. Still, faculty and alumni need more support from administrators, some warned —all the way from the presidents at the top, said Wolfson, the national AAUP president. 'I think they need to be bold,' Wolfson said. 'And this is hard to do but I'll say it anyway: They need to put their institution second, and then need to put higher education — as a critical sector in US society — first.' Claire Thornton can be reached at
Forbes
30-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
How College Leaders Can Play Offense On Value
The new the Carnegie Classifications now include a more central focus on value and economic ... More mobility, turning them into a highly impactful tool in college leaders' arsenal. There is as much variety among the nearly 4,000 degree-granting colleges and universities in the United States as in the nation itself. From tiny liberal arts colleges to massive universities with student populations as large as a major city—and everything in between—it's important to understand the differences among them. This is especially true as questions about the value of higher education continue to grow louder. Fortunately, one of the primary systems for differentiating colleges just got a major overhaul. A few weeks ago, the American Council on Education and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching unveiled a long-awaited update to the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education—colloquially known as the Carnegie Classifications—which are the main way that American colleges and universities are categorized and compared. Initially developed in 1973 to support research and policy analysis, the classification system has been updated every few years to reflect the changing higher education landscape. This year's changes, which marked the 10th update overall, were significant. Most notably, the Carnegie Classifications now include a more central focus on value and economic mobility, reflecting the growing shift of the higher education field in this direction. In addition to reimagining the basic classification types, the system now includes a new category to capture the institutions that improve student access and earnings. This means that the system now explicitly identifies the extent to which institutions provide access to underrepresented students and the degree to which students go on to earn competitive wages. This evolution is a noteworthy move for a system that has substantial influence over colleges' behavior and the options students and families consider to ensure the best possible outcome from investing in higher education. Historically, certain Carnegie categories have served as somewhat of a status symbol for colleges and universities. The 'R1' designation, for instance, came with a high degree of prestige and was often sought after by institutions looking to grow their national prominence. But those designations were primarily driven by the amount of funding spent on research and the highest-level degree types that different colleges awarded rather than factoring in student outcomes. While research is an important function of higher education, earning an R1 designation didn't indicate much about how well a particular institution actually served its students. Redefining the drivers of these classifications can help rewrite the markers of prestige for American colleges. And in a challenging postsecondary landscape and unpredictable political environment, this new system can help college leaders play offense—not defense—when it comes to proving their value. Those leaders who embrace the access and earnings information and use it to drive improvements will be directly responding to the questions and concerns that many are raising about value. Colleges and universities that can show that their graduates have strong career outcomes—especially those who admit a broader range of students from different socioeconomic backgrounds—will be distinguishing themselves in ways that are truly worthy of praise. In addition, the classifications' new consideration of regional economic context in measuring graduate earnings is a significant step. It recognizes that earning $40,000 per year in a small, rural community means something very different than earning $40,000 per year in a major city. The consideration of labor market and demographic differences as part of the overall evaluation of how well colleges are serving their students allows for a more nuanced understanding of an institution's value proposition within its specific community, economy and state. Regional context also incentivizes institutions to better serve their local economies. Allowing institutions with similar demographics and economic conditions to compare themselves to one another enables those who are excelling to inspire and inform other 'like' institutions. And if how well graduates do in the labor market is now a key driver of excellence, that should translate into greater economic mobility for students and a more prepared talent supply to fill key jobs in local economies. The new system also has the potential to be useful to consumers. Previous versions of the classification structure had limited meaning to students or families; the majority of students weren't concerned with going to a school that had achieved a particular Carnegie classification. Instead, they were (and are) interested in attending accessible colleges that are known to help their graduates achieve their goals and find success. A system that incorporates measures that matter to students and families and contextualizes colleges within their local communities has the potential to be a useful tool for helping people to understand their options and make informed choices. And in addition to the importance of delivering value to students, greater confidence among potential consumers is likely to help address the enrollment challenges that many institutions across the country currently face. The shift to a central focus on value in higher education requires leadership on multiple fronts. It requires demand from consumers, which has undeniably come to the fore in recent years. It requires states to set the right policies and incentives to drive their colleges and universities in the right direction. And, critically, it requires college leaders themselves to make changes in what they prioritize at their institutions. Given their traditional significance among higher education leaders, the evolution of the Carnegie Classifications marks an important change for one of the essential groups who can influence postsecondary value. The fact that demand for new classifications came from institutions themselves is a positive indicator of the field's willingness to make the tough changes necessary to deliver on higher education's promise. When paired with a shared vision and a smart state strategy, these new classifications can be a highly impactful tool in college leaders' arsenal. The great reorienting of higher education around value continues to move forward; and it's time for college leaders to play offense.
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The Republican Budget Bill Rips College Away From the Working Class
The budget bill that House Republicans passed early Thursday funds tax cuts for the rich by kneecapping Medicaid, slashing food stamps, and gutting green-energy investments—while also adding trillions to the deficit. But Republicans aren't content simply to take away health care and nutrition assistance from millions of Americans while accelerating climate change. The bill will also disproportionately hurt low-income students by making it harder for them to borrow and repay their loans and by tightening the rules for Pell Grants recipients. In doing so, it takes an axe to one of the few reliable ladders for working-class people seeking higher education. While there is some appetite for changes to the student loan program—total student debt is $1.6 trillion and growing, and more than five million borrowers are in default—they are not the ones that the Republican Congress has made. And no one was crying out for cuts to the Pell Grant program, a straightforward grant given to the lowest-income college students that don't have to be repaid. But these provisions in the bill are consistent with Republicans' broader attacks on higher education itself, which they consider to be corrupted by elitism and wokeism. Increasing the burden of student loans and tightening restrictions on Pell Grants, though, will only make it harder for working students to attend college. So much for the GOP's reverence for meritocracy. The changes to the Pell Grant program increase the number of credit hours that are required to qualify as a full-time student, from 12 to 15, and cut off aid entirely for students attending less than half time. For most college programs, that effectively requires one additional class per semester to get the maximum loan, around five classes total, and amounts to an almost $1,500 cut for students taking 12 credit hours who can't add to their courseload. It would also entirely cut off an estimated 20 percent of students currently receiving aid. 'It is a full-out assault on the ability of students—especially low-income students—to access and afford higher education,' Jon Fansmith, senior vice president for government relations and national engagement at the American Council on Education, told Inside Higher Ed last week. And it will only save the government an estimated $67 billion through the next decade, in a bill that the Congressional Budget Office estimates will add $3.1 trillion to the deficit over that time period. Advocates have said that the requirements are likely to hit the hardest for students who need to work or take care of a child while in college. 'It just completely ignores the reality that the majority of these students are not able to take five courses because they're also juggling the realities of life … working multiple part time jobs just to get by,' said Aissa Canchola Banez, the policy director at the Student Borrower Protection Center, a nonprofit that wants to eliminate student debt. The 50-year-old Pell Grant program was designed to enable the poorest students to attend school by providing them with tuition assistance they didn't have to pay back. Today, most recipients come from families making less than $60,000 a year. Overall, the value of the amount provided has diminished over the years because the small increases lawmakers have made haven't kept up with inflation, not to mention the much-faster rising costs of college. It once covered almost three-fourths of tuition, and now only covers a little over a quarter. As Pell Grants have decreased in value, students in need have relied more on student loans, both those provided by the government and by private lenders. Student debt has more than doubled in this century, as more students have gone to college and college costs have soared. Defaults rose over that time period as well. Borrowers have already been struggling to pay back those loans, especially those who borrowed but didn't finish to receive degrees, and the programs meant to help those in over their head weren't working as designed. Former President Joe Biden forgave a record number of student loans, largely by removing administrative barriers to forgiveness under existing laws. But Biden's biggest effort was blocked by the Supreme Court. Advocates have rallied around free college tuition at state universities and community colleges and increased aid like Pell Grants to help tackle the student loan crisis and the college affordability crisis. But the fight over student loans has helped make higher education funding more generally a target for the right. Republicans used the student loan crisis as a justification for these cuts. 'Our current student loan system is broken and has left students holding over $1.6 trillion in federal student loan debt, with taxpayers estimated to lose hundreds of billions of dollars on loans disbursed over the next decade,' GOP Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan said in a statement after the House Education and Workforce Committee passed the education cuts, adding that the bill 'would save taxpayers over $350 billion' and 'bring much-needed reform' of student loans. It's part and parcel with Republicans' wholesale assault on higher education. The Trump administration has gone directly after many elite colleges and universities over their DEI policies and students' pro-Palestinian protests. This bill will extend the fight to the state and community colleges that educate the vast majority of students in the U.S., particularly those from low-income and working-class families. Other efforts to cut government spending on higher education will also impede these institutions' ability to step in and provide help to the students who need it who can no longer count on Pell Grants to help cover their costs. Tying colleges and universities to the culture wars has helped stoke anti-elitism among the right. Republican voters are worried about the values colleges and universities teach and think these institutions hold too much sway over American culture, moving it too far left. This is especially true of older voters who presumably see their grandchildren in college and don't know what to make of the generational gaps they see in political thinking. It's led them to question not only what universities are teaching, but whether they hold value for society at all. There are criticisms of higher education that are more than fair. The cost of college has gotten too far out of reach for many Americans, and for those who must borrow and struggle to earn a degree, their eventual earnings are often offset by unmanageable debt. The rise in student debt has also led many policymakers to question whether too many professional fields require unnecessary credentials. The push for high school students to go to college has been accompanied by a decline in apprenticeship programs and other alternative pathways into careers that provide high-earning opportunities in blue-collar work. As the daughter of the plumber, I'm sympathetic to arguments that not everyone needs to go to college for a good, well-paying career. But that message seems most aimed at low-income students in poor communities, those who might benefit most from college and can afford it the least. Earlier in my career, I held a second job as a private tutor for SAT prep on Connecticut's Gold Coast, and those parents and students were all scrambling to get into the best colleges possible, never once doubting the value or their ability to afford it. I never once heard someone suggest they forgo college for a blue-collar career. Abandoning the idea that education can be an engine for social mobility would change the shape of the United States. And it's become clear that funding for colleges has now simply become a wedge in the ongoing culture wars and battle for voters, as college graduates of all classes have migrated to the Democratic Party and non-college graduates are wooed by the MAGA Republicans' faux populism. Needless to say, the cuts in the GOP bill were authored by congressmembers who not only attended college, but in many cases went to Ivy League schools and hold advanced degrees. The bill still has to pass the Senate, where the Republican majority is also slim, and GOP senators including Rand Paul of Kentucky and Josh Hawley of Missouri have objected to some provisions. Whatever happens in the upper chamber, the Republican Party has shown us that it plans to use the worries of the working-class to dismantle any government attempt to help them, even in the smallest ways.
USA Today
09-05-2025
- Business
- USA Today
Is college worth it? See which majors offer the highest return on your investment.
Is college worth it? See which majors offer the highest return on your investment. Show Caption Hide Caption Do college graduates have regrets about their chosen majors? With the rising cost of college, Americans currently owe nearly $1.8 trillion in student loan debt. What majors are worth the money? Americans currently owe nearly $1.8 trillion in student loan debt, but despite rising costs, going to college is a decision that can give you one of the best returns on your investment. The size of that return, however, can depend on what you major in. Degrees in engineering, math and computers, and business and economics provide the largest annual return, according to data compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. On average, a college graduate earns $32,000 more in a year than a worker with only a high school diploma, according to a new report from Federal Reserve economists. The payoff on a college degree stands near its all-time high, the economists report in an April 16 post from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. If you think of college as an investment, the return on that investment has held steady over the last three decades at 12% to 13% a year. 'I'd love to get that return on my savings account,' said Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, a nonprofit that represents college leaders. This year's graduates are eager to earn, with 62% reporting the most important aspect of a job is a good salary, according to Monster's 2025 State of the Graduate Report. Of 2025 graduates surveyed, only 12% said they'd be willing to accept an unpaid internship and 49% said they would never accept a job that doesn't come with a competitive salary and benefits, up 5% from last year. The majority of new graduates surveyed plan to pursue careers in some traditionally lucrative fields including business, healthcare, computer technology, and finance. However, their ability to land jobs in those industries and earn a high paycheck can depend on what they studied and how long they stayed in school. Career experts agree dream jobs and large salaries don't always come right away. 'It's a hard world out there for a lot of people who are not just highly educated, but have built these careers and have a trusted resume of previous experience. It's hard for them to get a job,' Emily Levine, executive vice president at recruitment firm Career Group Companies, told USA TODAY. 'If you want to get a job somewhat quickly and start contributing and earning money, it most likely won't be your dream job. And that's okay." The college salary boost rises throughout a career If the goal of college is to earn more money, then the New York Fed report suggests academia is doing a good job. The analysis found that a typical college graduate earns about $80,000 a year, compared with $47,000 for a worker with a high school diploma. The college wage premium tends to grow throughout a career. 'Judging the value of a college degree is not about your first job. It's about the advantage you get over your working life,' said Jaison Abel, head of microeconomics at the New York Fed. College isn't worth it for everyone. The return on investment is lower for students who take more than four years to finish, the economists found. Some majors yield a higher annual return than others: Around 18% for math, computers and engineering; 14% for health sciences; and 8% for liberal arts. 'There's almost no wage premium for the bottom 25% of graduates,' those with the lowest lifetime earnings, said Richard Deitz, an economic policy advisor at the New York Fed. Many Americans feel college is too expensive. A 2024 report from the New America think tank found that more than 80% of Americans think the cost of college is the biggest factor that stops students from enrolling. 'I think that when people talk about, 'Is college worth it?', what they're upset about is the cost,' said Phillip Levine, a Wellesley College economist who studies college pricing. 'They have this impression in their head of skyrocketing college costs, and they don't have an impression of skyrocketing benefits.' A crisis of confidence in higher education The New York Fed report comes at a moment of crisis in higher education. The Trump administration is threatening billions of dollars in federal funding to elite universities over their policies on diversity, equity and inclusion. Trump officials also accuse the higher education sector of abusing the student loan system, invoking perennial complaints about runaway tuition and spiraling debt. In a April 21 Wall Street Journal op-ed, new Education Secretary Linda McMahon accused the industry of 'hiking tuition and piling up multibillion-dollar endowments while students graduate six figures in the red.' The DEI broadsides resonate with Trump's base. Half of Republicans have 'little or no' confidence in higher education, compared with 12% of Democrats, according to Gallup polling. Among those who lack faith in academia, the most common complaint is that colleges harbor political agendas. Concerns run from liberal bias to rising costs to lackluster career preparation. A 2024 report from Pew Research Center found that only 22% of Americans believe college is worth the cost for a student who must take out loans. Only 1 in 4 said a college degree is very important for getting a good-paying job. College 'sticker shock' scares many Americans Academic leaders say Americans focus too much on the sticker price of college, which now exceeds $70,000 a year in tuition and fees at the priciest schools. 'The sticker price is a number that every college and university needs to post on their web page by law. It's the easiest number to find,' Levine said. But few students pay the sticker price. The actual price of college for most students is much lower. The average net price in tuition and fees for an in-state student at a four-year public college plummeted by 40% in a decade, after inflation, from $4,140 in 2014-15 to an estimated $2,480 in 2024-25, according to a recent report from the College Board. At private nonprofit colleges, average tuition and fees have dwindled from $18,680 in 2014 to an estimated $16,510 in 2024, after accounting for inflation and aid. As for student loans: Roughly half of students at public universities completed their degrees without debt in the 2022-23 academic year, compared with about two-fifths of students a decade earlier, the College Board found. Among all graduates with loans, the balance averaged $29,300 in the 2022-23 academic year, down from $34,800 a decade earlier, adjusted for inflation. 'The student loan crisis is overblown,' Mitchell of the American Council on Education said. Colleges need to communicate better on price Mitchell, Levine and others say colleges need to do a better job of communicating with the public about price. For many years, Levine said, academic leaders have been reluctant to share the sort of data compiled by the College Board: The actual price of attendance for a typical student, based on family income and wealth. That stance is changing. Consider Princeton University: Annual tuition, fees, housing and food at Princeton averages $82,650. But the average student receives $72,000 in grant aid. Thus, the average net cost of a year at Princeton is $10,650. Princeton offers those numbers in plain-spoken fashion on its website. Many other colleges do not. Another selective school, Washington University in Saint Louis, has partnered with Levine to offer an 'Instant Net Price Estimator,' which gives a ballpark estimate of college costs based on household income and siblings attending college. Levine provides similar estimates for other schools on a site called MyinTuition. 'We need somebody smarter than I to figure out a way to communicate price that is encouraging rather than discouraging,' Mitchell said. 'And we haven't gotten there yet.' Contributing: Rachel Barber
Boston Globe
06-05-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Brown, MIT sue NSF over massive research fund cuts
The suit was also filed alongside the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education, and the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities. Advertisement In their filing, the plaintiffs said the cuts were unlawful and, if they were to occur, would 'badly undermine scientific research at America's universities and erode our nation's enviable status as a global leader in scientific research and innovation.' Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up Mike England, a spokesman for the NSF, declined to comment for this story On Friday, the NSF announced it would cap reimbursement for indirect research costs at 15 percent for all new grants awarded to colleges — a move that mirrors new policies at the NSF provides funding to higher education institutions, and allocated $7.2 billion in 2024 for research and other related activities. During that fiscal year, the agency funded projects at 1,850 colleges and universities. Advertisement Since the Trump administration announced it would make a third attempt to cap the reimbursement rate at another major scientific agency, higher education groups have called the direction 'misguided,' and said these cuts would harm the nation's research enterprise. 'The third time is not a charm; rather, it is disaster in the making for American science [and] technology and our nation's continuing competitiveness,' said Matt Owens, president of COGR, an organization for research universities and medical centers, in Owens said NSF-sponsored research has 'propelled' scientific discoveries that are 'vital to American innovation [and] competitiveness,' including semiconductors, the internet, and 3-D printing. Kara D. Freeman, the president and CEO of the National Association of College and University Business Officers, said the cuts were 'short-sighted and ultimately against the nation's interests.' 'This retrenchment is not a good deal for taxpayers,' Freeman said in a In Providence, Brown is already facing a Advertisement Brown has had about three dozen grants for scientific research cut by the Trump administration in the last couple of months, many of them related to gender, race, or diversity, equity and inclusion, said Clark. 'There are a significant number of uncertainties,' Clark told the Globe. He said the university is planning for all possible scenarios, and asking researchers to pause discretionary funding temporarily. Widespread cuts could mean layoffs and the end of high-impact research, Clark noted. Clark and a spokesperson for MIT did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the impact of the NSF cuts. Alexa Gagosz can be reached at
