urgent issues and modern challenges of higher education

Urgent issues and modern challenges of higher education

Chat with Paper: Save time, read 10X faster with AI

Content maybe subject to  copyright     Report

Indian government E-learning initiatives in response to COVID-19 crisis: A case study on online learning in Indian higher education system.

Analysis of students’ ability in completing hots-based basic physics questions, challenges of online teaching-learning in higher education sector amid covid-19: a study through the lens of students and teachers of west bengal, 21 issues for the 21st century: results of the unep foresight process on emerging environmental issues, informatization of technical vocational schools: theoretical foundations and practical approaches, related papers (5), methods for forecasting the development of science in higher education., challenges for education in the information society, modern education technology with creativity of continuing education, educational administration management system and modern education management on the perspective of modern information technology, the engineer's role in the modern world., trending questions (3).

- Social role reduction, loss of academic community's influence. - Need for interactive teaching methods and online learning technologies.

Challenges in modern education include the need for intellectual effort, scientific approaches, quality higher education, and addressing crises like social, economic, and environmental issues.

Not addressed in the paper.

2024 Higher Education Trend Watch

This report focuses on the workforce, cultural, and technological shifts for seven macro trends that are continuing or emerging in higher education in 2024. Across these three areas of shift, we report the major impacts and steps that institutions are taking in response to each trend. Many of the trend topics and issues remain consistent with the 2023 Higher Education Trend Watch. Colleges and universities continue to face challenges with enrollments, rising costs and uncertainty in funding, resignation and migration of leaders and staff, and increasing security and privacy threats. Yet, many institutions have moved from early reactive phases to a stronger focus on improvement and sustainability. For example, institutional leaders are devoting more efforts toward digital transformation and institutional resilience and, as part of this, are making data-informed decisions in addition to strengthening their technology infrastructure to protect against the growing threats to personal privacy. In response to the demand for flexible work and learning options, institutions are continuing to implement and improve hybrid and remote work and learning arrangements. Finally, institutions are also devoting significantly more attention and resources to individuals' mental health, wellness, and belonging while increasing efforts toward creating equitable and inclusive environments and experiences.

Respondents to the 2024 Top 10 IT Issues survey were provided not only with a list of 20 IT Issues but also with a list of 20 wider trends emerging around the higher education landscape. For each of the emerging trends, we asked respondents to rate the level of impact on their institution's technology strategy, policies, and/or practice. The interactive table below summarizes the trend impacts as rated by the respondents and includes dropdown menus for exploring how the trends and their impacts differ across institutional sizes and types.

IT TRENDS RANKINGS

In this section of the report, we take a closer look at the emerging higher education trends selected as most important by the survey respondents, with summaries of the planning and actions they're exploring or implementing at their institutions in response to each trend. Responses have been categorized along three primary areas of institutional shift: workforce, culture, and technology.

How are institutions responding to Increasing need for data security and protection against threats to personal privacy ?

Shifts in Workforce: The complexity of phishing attacks and risks such as data loss are at an all-time high, and institutions are struggling to keep up with the "patch and protect" cycle needed to secure data. Some institutions are bringing on new leadership in response to these challenges, in addition to forming committees and working groups (e.g., information security groups, data privacy committees, and ransomware teams) tasked with cybersecurity and privacy initiatives. However, even if institutions hire more staff, cybersecurity and privacy personnel will still be challenged to keep up with the constantly evolving and increasingly complex data and regulatory landscape.

Shifts in Culture: An ever-changing landscape of compliance and regulations and exponential growth of threat actors is causing institutions to need broader cybersecurity and privacy programs, in addition to the funding to support them. Institutional leaders are conducting more security training and are establishing data security and privacy as core competencies for faculty, staff, and students. They are also revising policies and developing new strategic plans (especially to align with new regulatory requirements), implementing better risk assessment and remediation plans, and putting stronger emphasis on operational initiatives on data security and threat detection and intelligence. Respondents also noted that their institutions are implementing more robust security measures such as zero trust environments and DMZ networks, in addition to securing certifications (e.g., HITRUST).

Shifts in Technology: Institutions are continuing to tighten controls to secure their perimeters–some campuses are removing administrative rights from devices, excluding foreign countries from systems, and implementing mandatory operating system upgrades. Institutions are also continuing to strengthen and standardize their endpoint management by exploring new identity management solutions and by making multi-factor authentication and single sign-on more widespread (e.g., implementation across all applications and services). Some respondents noted that their institutions are adopting new frameworks such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cybersecurity framework and security information and event management solutions to improve their risk management. Yet other respondents noted that they have not been able to adopt new and needed technology due to a lack of the staff and time required to safely implement new technologies.

How are institutions responding to Demand for continued hybrid and remote work arrangements ?

Shifts in Workforce: Institutions continue to navigate the great resignation, and in response, many have adopted hybrid and remote work arrangements to retain employees and attract new talent. The implementation of hybrid/remote work options is helping institutions to attract candidates for positions that are typically difficult to fill and is also helping to expand their recruitment pool by drawing in individuals from disparate geographic locations. Some institutional leaders are thinking beyond staffing issues and are considering their employees' health and well-being–implementing flexible work options to promote a healthier work/life balance and facilitating increased productivity, employee satisfaction, and overall organizational resilience.

Shifts in Culture: Well past the emergency move to hybrid and remote work, many institutions are now looking to more intentional and strategic implementation and revision of alternative work arrangements—developing guidelines, policies, and procedures and also working to determine the right balance of on-site and remote work. However, not all colleges and universities are in the same stage of policy development and implementation. Some have already implemented official remote and flexible work arrangement guidelines and policies, others are revising policies that had previously been implemented, and still others are in earlier phases of policy development planning. Tensions exist, since some leaders, faculty, and staff believe on-site work is optimal. Nevertheless, institutions are increasingly moving toward embracing flexible work options.

Shifts in Technology: With a steady demand for hybrid and remote work options, the expectation that members of the campus community can connect from any place, from any device, and at any time has never been stronger. As a result, institutions continue to adopt technologies to support remote work, including collaboration, security, and other technologies needed to maintain growing and evolving networks and infrastructures. As a consequence, technology personnel are becoming more involved in ongoing conversations about hybrid and remote work so that they can best support everyday operations. Institutional leaders are consulting their IT professionals as they decide what mix of hybrid/remote work arrangements they should offer, what technology will be needed for the continuation of hybrid/remote work, and how workspaces can be (re)designed to best support a mix of work arrangements (e.g., consolidation of spaces, shared interdepartmental cubicles, huddle rooms, Zoom conference rooms).

How are institutions responding to More calls for data-informed decision-making and reporting ?

Shifts in Workforce: The growth in demand for data-informed decision-making continues to reshape the data analytics workforce in higher education. Institutions are trying to keep up with the personnel, including IT professionals, to support data governance. Respondents noted that their institutions have created new leadership positions and that individuals in these roles are specifically tasked with making data-informed institutional decisions. However, the creation of new positions and successful hiring and retention remain a challenge alongside workload and budget issues. In response, staff are being onboarded from existing data-related areas across the institution to assist with data warehouses and reporting functionalities, and IT professionals are increasingly involved with supporting data governance and infrastructure.

Shifts in Culture: As institutions continue to face challenges with enrollments and funding, campus leaders are asking for more data to enhance institutional effectiveness, improve decision-making processes, and make informed strategic choices that positively impact student success, operational efficiency, and overall institutional outcomes. The calls for data are also becoming more widespread, extending beyond leadership: students, faculty, and others are asking how data is being used to inform decisions. Institutions are now focused on getting data into a usable format and into the hands of those who need it for decision-making. To break down decentralized and siloed data systems, institutions not only are investing more money into their data infrastructure but also are developing and revising governance, policies, and programs that support new centralized systems for data and reporting, along with testing new solutions that make data analysis and interpretation easier and more efficient.

Shifts in Technology: Institutions continue to update their technology infrastructure to answer calls for better systems and tools for reporting and information, including feasible ways to analyze large datasets, as well as calls for data that is not only accurate but also easier to access and use. Institutional leaders are reviewing and piloting new reporting and analytics technologies such as modern ERP software and data lakes powered by generative AI. Some respondents noted that their institutions are also identifying duplicate applications that hinder data use, in addition to integrating products for analytics.

How are institutions responding to More attention to well-being and mental health ?

Shifts in Workforce: Many institutions are prioritizing mental health, not just for students but also for employees. Institutions have increased funding for mental health initiatives, leading to a growth in the mental health workforce and an expansion of programs and services offered. Institutions have hired more student success and mental health counselors, while others have responded to the demand for services by collaborating with third parties to provide professional mental health services to students and employees.

Shifts in Culture: Many institutions have increased support and funding for mental health and, as part of this, have expanded their services with offices for students' holistic well-being and mental health, wellness centers, and programs for students to understand what may be "just stress" versus a mental health crisis. Some institutions have implemented community groups where people can share and find support. As part of this expansion, institutions have also increased their outreach efforts, helping to raise awareness about mental health and available resources. Importantly, respondents noted that their institutions have started to create a genuine culture of understanding–one in which mental health is viewed as being just as important as physical health, students have more access to accommodations, and faculty and staff have more access to flexible work policies.

Shifts in Technology: Partners across campus are implementing software and systems to support access to services by students and employees. Institutions are also now investing in mental health technologies and tools such as campus-wide wellness apps that provide information on stress, anxiety, and sleep, in addition to activities and exercises that aid wellness (e.g., meditation, mindfulness, and self-assessment activities). Institutions have also implemented mental health training tools and classes for faculty and staff to be able to better identify and support students in need.

How are institutions responding to Increased efforts toward creating equitable and inclusive environments and experiences ?

Shifts in Workforce: Institutions are expanding their workforce to support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) on their campuses by bringing in staff to serve as equal employment opportunity professionals and DEI officers, specialists, and researchers. Some institutions have created new divisions or departments that report directly to the president on campus-wide DEI and belonging issues and initiatives.

Shifts in Culture: Many institutions are continuing to devote time and resources to increasing equity and inclusion, though some respondents noted that these efforts have been thwarted on their campuses due to the disbanding of DEI programs in some states and/or lack of funding. Those institutions that are able to move forward with DEI initiatives are focusing on equity and accessibility in the classroom–putting a stronger emphasis on ADA compliance (e.g., stronger enforcement of accessibility requirements for accurate transcripts of lecture recordings and other recorded course materials). Institutions are also taking another look at course design. Some are implementing Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles and are discussing equity and inclusion in online and hybrid courses and how to ensure that students have comparable experiences across instructional modalities. Institutions are also increasing their support for students who face challenges with accessing food, clothing, housing, and technology (e.g., by implementing programs and services such as on-campus pantries and wellness hubs where students can obtain food, clothing, and other items they need).

Shifts in Technology: Institutions are implementing loaner technology programs to help bridge the technological divide for financially underserved students. Some have already invested in new technology and tools that meet DEI standards, in addition to implementing accessibility policies to ensure that digital resources and platforms are accessible to all campus members. Institutions are also being more intentional in their selection of technology before implementation, for example by using resources that help potential users to compare and assess available tools based on equity and inclusion.

How are institutions responding to Growing efforts toward digital transformation and institutional resilience ?

Shifts in Workforce: IT professionals' involvement with broader areas of the institution continues to increase. As institutions devote more efforts toward digital transformation (Dx) and institutional resilience, ensuring that IT has a seat at the table has risen in importance. Institutional leaders are placing their IT leaders on teams to help with strategic planning and implementation surrounding Dx and resilience, and they are also ensuring that IT leaders are collaborating not only with each other but also with non-IT leaders.

Shifts in Culture: Some institutions have now incorporated Dx and resilience initiatives into their strategic plans. On some campuses, the prioritization of data-informed decision-making is driving these initiatives. Other institutions are taking a broader approach, creating new transformation initiatives that aim to adapt to changing technological landscapes, enhance operational efficiency, and foster innovation—with the goal of ensuring that institutions remain agile and competitive in the modern higher education landscape.

Shifts in Technology: In the midst of their digital transformation and resilience efforts, institutions are establishing a formal IT operating model and are revamping their IT roadmap to include a variety of projects focusing on system and process optimization. As part of this, some institutions are transforming and redesigning existing systems and practices, such as those surrounding student information systems and identity access management and integration. Others are adopting entirely new technologies including cloud-based platforms, ERP systems, and software as a service.

How are institutions responding to Increased focus on improving hybrid and online learning ?

Shifts in Workforce: As a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic and the emergency move to remote teaching and learning, demand for flexibility has grown steadily, not just by students but also by faculty and staff. Institutions are responding to these calls for flexwork and flexible learning, and many now regularly offer multiple modalities for work and learning. Institutions are working to ensure that they have the infrastructure in place to support a workforce that is more geographically diverse. As part of this, institutions are devoting more resources and personnel to support work across modalities, in addition to providing more training opportunities to improve experiences and outcomes via different modalities.

Shifts in Culture: Institutions are focusing on improving online and hybrid learning models that have been implemented. Some are establishing new programs and divisions (e.g., colleges of professional and continuing studies) with the goal of offering a wider range of flexible educational options, catering to the needs of diverse learners, and promoting accessibility. Institutions are also making significant investments to provide support and resources, including data, to equalize and improve student outcomes across all modalities, in addition to updating policies and training. Some respondents noted that their institutions are now allowing faculty more choice in teaching modalities in an effort to improve the teaching and learning experience.

Shifts in Technology: Technology to enable hybrid teaching and learning has become a key aspect of classroom planning. Many institutions have upgraded or redesigned learning spaces and have added designated classrooms for HyFlex and hybrid learning. Institutions are actively working with platform providers and internal teams to make significant improvements to user experience by providing access to tools and plug-ins for academic tools and by continuing to upgrade classroom technology to make more spaces hybrid friendly. Some institutions are also providing faculty with professional development opportunities that focus on online assessments and collaboration and learning management tools.

Although the next steps for each institution must be carefully charted out according to its own context, mission, resources, and needs, the following EDUCAUSE resources and professional learning opportunities can provide leaders and practitioners with general guidance to get started, strategies to consider, and peer communities to contact.

• For improving data security and protection against threats to personal privacy, check out the newly updated EDUCAUSE Cybersecurity and Privacy Guide , the "Growing Needs and Opportunities for Security Awareness Training" QuickPoll, and the EDUCAUSE Review Cybersecurity and Privacy channel.
• For additional information on hybrid and remote work arrangements , see the Working Remotely page in the EDUCAUSE Library.
• For professional learning support in the data literacy and skills needed for data-informed decision-making , consider registering for the upcoming Data Literacy Institute (January 22–March 15, 2024) or a "Data Governance Essentials " Learning Lab (April 2024).
• For more information on well-being and mental health, check out the 2023 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Holistic Student Experience Edition and the EDUCAUSE Library Mental Health and Wellness page.
• For support with creating equitable and inclusive environments , see the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) channel in EDUCAUSE Review and the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion page in the EDUCAUSE Library. You can also check out the "Steering Analytics Toward an Equitable Future " Showcase.
• For more information on digital transformation and institutional resilience , the 2024 EDUCAUSE Top 10 describes the contributions that technology, data, and the workforce will make to advance three dimensions of institutional resilience: mission resilience, operational resilience, and financial resilience. See also the EDUCAUSE Review Digital Transformation (Dx) channel.
• For help with improving hybrid and online learning, check out the 2023 Students and Technology Report and the 2023 Faculty and Technology Report . For further support, consider registering for the EDUCAUSE Digital Learning Transformation Institute (May 6–June 28, 2024) or upcoming Learning Labs on Designing Hybrid-Flexible (HyFlex) Courses to Support Multimodal Learning Environments (May 2024).

Visit the IT Issues web page for additional resources.

© 2024 Nicole Muscanell. The content of this work is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.

Citation for this work Nicole Muscanell. 2024 Higher Education Trend Watch. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE, January 8, 2024.

EDUCAUSE is a higher education technology association and the largest community of IT leaders and professionals committed to advancing higher education. Technology, IT roles and responsibilities, and higher education are dynamically changing. Formed in 1998, EDUCAUSE supports those who lead, manage, and use information technology to anticipate and adapt to these changes, advancing strategic IT decision-making at every level within higher education. EDUCAUSE is a global nonprofit organization whose members include US and international higher education institutions, corporations, not-for-profit organizations, and K–12 institutions. With a community of more than 99,000 individuals at member organizations located around the world, EDUCAUSE encourages diversity in perspective, opinion, and representation. For more information, please visit educause.edu.

Higher education is struggling. Psychologists are navigating its uncertain future

Many of the dramatic changes in society are fueling faculty burnout, high turnover, and political attacks on academic freedom

Vol. 55 No. 1 Print version: page 48

[ This article is part of the 2024 Trends Report ]

The Covid -19 pandemic upended the economy and exacerbated concerns about financial stability in higher education. More recently, falling tuition dollars and the looming enrollment cliff are forcing cuts or closures at many institutions, precisely when students need more support than ever. Those entering college today have faced years of erratic schooling and a widespread mental health crisis .

But students are not the only ones struggling. The majority of faculty report feeling burned out because of work: They face their own set of stressors, such as adapting to ChatGPT in the classroom and, for faculty of color, providing extra support for students of color. Meanwhile, employee turnover at colleges and universities continues to rise.

“Workers in higher ed feel like they’re being nickeled and dimed, they’re being overworked, and they’re not being recognized. What better recipe is there to drive people toward other jobs?” said cognitive psychologist Jacqueline Bichsel, PhD, director of research at the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR).

In a growing number of states, institutions also face the added pressures of political attacks on academic freedom, tenure, and university governance systems . Faculty are being silenced on subjects ranging from gender identity to reproductive health, while administrators are seeing their decision-making powers seized by politicians.

“What kind of an environment are we creating at these institutions, which have long been based on the idea of free inquiry and academic freedom? It’s frightening to think about where we’re headed,” said Afshan Jafar, PhD, chair and professor of sociology at Connecticut College and cochair of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Special Committee on Academic Freedom and Florida.

On top of it all, higher education may mean something fundamentally different today. With growing questions about the value of education, some potential students question whether they should even go to college. At the same time, coming of age amid a pandemic, climate change, and fierce political clashes has left many of today’s students uncertain about what lies ahead, said psychologist Kisha Jones, PhD, an assistant professor of global leadership and management at Florida International University.

“What is it like to be motivated, to be excited about your career and excited about the future, when things look so bleak?” she said.

A dark place

Political battles across the nation have created an increasingly hostile world for academics. Those who speak in support of topics such as vaccination and racial equity have faced harassment and death threats; many are leaving X, formerly known as Twitter , in search of safer forums or taking extra steps to protect themselves, both online and off.

Alongside the routine threats and harassment , academics are also navigating deliberate, state-sponsored attempts to control higher education and dismantle academic systems and structures that have governed U.S. colleges and universities for centuries. New laws passed in Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and other states limit or prohibit instruction on various subjects, including race, sex, and American history, and even seek to broadly restrict discussing “current, controversial topics” ( PEN America Index of Educational Gag Orders, 2023 ).

“Where I’m located, these laws create a lot of fear among faculty. Often, it’s easier to just drop material and avoid a controversial topic,” said David Strohmetz, PhD, chair and professor of psychology at the University of West Florida, who recently chose to exclude a section on sexuality and gender identity from one of his psychology courses due to concerns about the political climate.

A new Florida law seeks to undermine tenure by reviewing tenured professors’ research and teaching at least every 5 years, while other legislation in the state weakens teachers’ unions and strengthens the role of politicians in higher-ed decision-making. (Several other states, including Texas, Louisiana, and Iowa, have also proposed legislation that aims to limit or end tenure .) These actions amount to a coordinated attack that could ultimately lead to authoritarian control of the state’s education system, said Jafar.

“When you’re attacking governance at the same time that you’re attacking the ideals of academic freedom and free inquiry, you’re heading to a really dark place in academia, where people now have no means to fight the changes that are coming their way,” she said.

The laws are already triggering “brain drain” in the state, with more than one-third of the faculty at New College of Florida departing since Governor Ron DeSantis began his overhaul of the school. And nearly one-third of faculty in Florida, Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina said they are actively looking for jobs in other states, according to an August 2023 AAUP survey of 4,250 faculty members ( AAUP national release, Sept. 2023 ).

“Those who are left behind are now forced to figure out how to survive in this environment,” which is likely to further diminish the quality of teaching and research in those states, Jafar said.

The academic gap

The instability of recent years has also left students struggling—and that affects everyone on campus. Some faculty have observed that students from the so-called pandemic generation lack basic skills such as time management that are essential for success in college and may have a shakier academic foundation than students who had a typical high school experience.

“There’s concern about the impact of the academic gap after losing those 3 years. Is this a blip, or has education at the secondary level been fundamentally changed?” Strohmetz said.

Student mental health also remains in crisis. Data from the Healthy Minds Study, which surveys tens of thousands of students across the nation each year about mental health, shows a slight positive change during the 2022–23 academic year. But 14% of students still reported considering suicide, and more than 40% screened positive for clinically significant symptoms of depression. Some populations, including LGBTQ+ students, report even higher rates of mental health problems ( The Healthy Minds Study: 2022–2023 Data Report [PDF, 170KB] ).

Those concerning figures are impacting academic institutions more broadly, said Sarah Lipson, PhD, an associate professor in Boston University’s School of Public Health and principal investigator of the Healthy Minds Study. Faculty are changing the way courses are taught and working to connect students to services before they are in crisis. Administrators are rolling out public health campaigns, counseling services, and new support systems. Those changes are welcome, Lipson said, but can be taxing on institutions already strained for resources.

“The urgency around student mental health has infiltrated so many different aspects of higher education,” she said.

Meanwhile, schools are scrambling to adapt to a new challenge: how to handle artificial intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT, in the classroom. In some cases, that requires reimagining coursework to preclude cheating and to help students learn to use ChatGPT to enhance—rather than replace—their own critical thinking.

“We have to take on the challenge as educators to find a way to weave that into assignments, so we’re preparing students for a workplace where there will be a shift in the skills needed to succeed,” said Jones, of Florida International University.

Those shifting sands put pressure on the glue that holds higher education together: its workforce. In a 2022–23 Healthy Minds survey of faculty and instructors, 64% of those questioned said they felt burned out because of work ( Exploring Faculty Burnout through the 2022–23 HMS Faculty/Staff Survey, APA ). Faculty who are women, gender minorities, or people of color tend to report even higher rates of burnout. A 2023 APA report found that faculty of color are expected to do extra “invisible labor,” such as mentoring students of color and educating their White colleagues about diversity ( APA Task Force Report on Tenure and Promotion for Faculty of Color, 2023 ).

For staff, higher education is steadily becoming an undesirable place to work. Turnover during the 2022–23 school year was the highest it has been since CUPA-HR began tracking it 7 years ago ( The CUPA-HR 2023 Higher Education Employee Retention Survey ). Only about half of employees reported being recognized regularly for their work, and few received raises on par with inflation. The majority want flexible or hybrid work arrangements, but only about one-third receive them.

“When retention efforts are nonexistent, turnover is going to remain high,” said Bichsel. “Higher education institutions need to start positioning themselves as employers of choice, or they’ll be left only with candidates and employees who cannot find something better—those who have fewer qualifications, less experience, or cannot relocate for other reasons.”

Focus on students

Since the pandemic began, the financial model of higher education has been put to the test. Demand has dropped, but schools have struggled to cut costs without compromising quality.

That puts higher-ed institutions in a tight spot as they fight to survive and adapt. Some have moved toward a corporate culture in senior leadership, but Jafar warned that such a shift can also put colleges and universities at risk. Traditional academic governance systems—which move more slowly and typically include additional checks and balances—have an important function: protecting academic institutions from outside influence, including political attacks on academic freedom.

As colleges and universities navigate the stormy seas of financial uncertainty, workforce instability, and technological change, Jones highlights the importance of staying focused on the group at the center of it all: students.

“Younger generations have completely different concerns than we do. Do they have a chance to contribute to society? Will there even be a society for them to contribute to?” she said. “It’s important to recognize the impact that will have on everything in academia, from enrollment to engagement to what people choose to study.”

Further reading

Academic independence under fire Abrams, Z., Monitor on Psychology , 2023

How to use ChatGPT as a learning tool Abramson, A., Monitor on Psychology , 2023

Hopeful despite headwinds: A survey of presidents Lederman, D., Inside Higher Ed , 2023

Higher ed’s ruinous resistance to change Rosenberg, B., The Chronicle of Higher Education , 2023

Is it time for tenure to evolve? Dance, A., Nature , 2023

Recommended Reading

Six things psychologists are talking about.

The APA Monitor on Psychology ® sister e-newsletter offers fresh articles on psychology trends, new research, and more.

Welcome! Thank you for subscribing.

Speaking of Psychology

Subscribe to APA’s audio podcast series highlighting some of the most important and relevant psychological research being conducted today.

Subscribe to Speaking of Psychology and download via:

Contact APA

You may also like.

You are using an outdated browser. This website is best viewed in IE 9 and above. You may continue using the site in this browser. However, the site may not display properly and some features may not be supported. For a better experience using this site, we recommend upgrading your version of Internet Explorer or using another browser to view this website.

- Download the latest Internet Explorer - No thanks (close this window)

• Penn GSE Environmental Justice Statement
• Philadelphia Impact
• Global Initiatives
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Catalyst @ Penn GSE
• Penn GSE Leadership
• Program Finder
• Academic Divisions & Programs
• Professional Development & Continuing Education
• Teacher Programs & Certifications
• Undergraduates
• Dual and Joint Degrees
• Faculty Directory
• Research Centers, Projects & Initiatives
• Lectures & Colloquia
• Books & Publications
• Academic Journals
• Application Requirements & Deadlines
• Tuition & Financial Aid
• Campus Visits & Events
• International Students
• Options for Undergraduates
• Non-Degree Studies
• Contact Admissions / Request Information
• Life at Penn GSE
• Penn GSE Career Paths
• Living in Philadelphia
• DE&I Resources for Students
• Student Organizations
• Career & Professional Development
• News Archive
• Events Calendar
• The Educator's Playbook
• Find an Expert
• Race, Equity & Inclusion
• Counseling & Psychology
• Education Innovation & Entrepreneurship
• Education Policy & Analysis
• Higher Education
• Language, Literacy & Culture
• Teaching & Learning
• Support Penn GSE
• Contact Development & Alumni Relations
• Find a Program
• Request Info
• Make a Gift
• Current Students
• Staff & Faculty

Search form

You are here, six trends that will influence higher education in 2021.

Released weeks before the first American COVID-19 cases were reported,  The College Stress Test  revealed how close many universities were to financial ruin — predictions borne out as colleges were forced to lay off employees, eliminate programs, and close their doors for good.

Co-author Robert Zemsky, a luminary in the field and a professor in Penn GSE’s Higher Education Division, spent the summer briefing university leaders, boards of trustees, system administrators, and policy makers on what’s coming next. 

Here are the six trends Zemsky says will influence higher education decision making in 2021:

Leaders just might get real about the business model

The pandemic revealed that many college leaders didn’t fully understand how their universities operated as businesses. Or that “residual expenses” — profits made off services like room and board — balanced the books. In a typical case, a 1,200-student college earned $5 million in profit last year on these charges. There isn’t an easy way to recoup those losses.

Expect the leadership team — even the lifelong academics — to put these line items front and center in any discussion about opening online or in person, even at those schools dealing with COVID outbreaks this fall.  

Tenured faculty will face a squeeze

What do tenured faculty dread more, a bigger course load or a pay cut? That’s the choice universities will soon face. 

Zemsky says college leaders will have fewer options than they think to reduce non-academic costs. That leaves academic costs, where the first choice for many will be a faculty pay cut. But that’s the wrong choice, Zemsky says.

Instead, colleges should hire fewer adjuncts and up the required course load for tenured faculty. 

The traditional curriculum could be transformed

In a traditional year, half the colleges in America lose at least a quarter of their freshman class. This was always an embarrassing educational failure, but the cash crunch is forcing colleges to see their retention problem as a revenue problem. 

It’s time for colleges to get serious about transforming the traditional curriculum. Today’s students are smart. They can seek out information, collaborate, and create. But many of them don’t get excited by long reading lists. Zemsky says it’s time to update the curriculum to challenge students in a way that fits their learning styles. 

The three-year degree could be adopted

Most American students don’t really need four years to earn a college degree. The three-year degree makes sense, both financially and academically, Zemsky says. 

There was some buzz about moving toward three-year degrees a few years ago, but colleges didn’t feel an urgency to make the change. They will now. 

Sports will dominate headlines … for all the wrong reasons

Major college football programs’ “will they/won’t they” drama captured the headlines this fall, but Zemsky says university leaders will have to focus on athletics throughout the year “for all the wrong reasons.”

The budgets of many colleges — even those that are never on TV — are entangled with their athletic departments in ways that are increasingly uncomfortable. The longer it’s not safe for most sports to play — and the longer the NCAA has to go without staging the televised events that subsidize small conferences — the more sports will bleed general funds.

Campus leaders will not be calling all of the shots

Before this year, college leaders enjoyed wide latitude to call the shots on their campuses. Not anymore. As many colleges in California learned this fall, a president’s plan to start classes in person might only get as far as the local health department.  

You May Be Interested In

Related stories.

• The next higher ed crisis: finding leaders

Related Topics

Faculty expert.

Related News

Media inquiries.

Penn GSE Communications is here to help reporters connect with the education experts they need.

Kat Stein Executive Director of Penn GSE Communications (215) 898-9642 [email protected]  

New UNESCO report unpacks current trends and challenges to right to higher education

What are the state legal obligations related to higher education? How do they apply in the context of increased human movement, rising inequalities and growing digitalization? What are national measures taken to advance this right, and what are the challenges faced?

In the context of the World Higher Education Conference 2022 (WHEC22) held in May 2022 , the new UNESCO  Report ‘ Right to higher education: unpacking the international normative framework in light of current trends and challenges ’, published jointly with the Right to Education Initiative , tackles these questions with the aim to ensure that the human-rights based approach is placed at the heart of the higher education debate.

Despite a 100% increase in the number of enrolments in the past 20 years, access to higher education is still being limited due to its cost, discriminatory practices, lack of supportive measures and rigid admission processes which reinforce inequalities. Digital education is both an opportunity and a threat to the implementation of the right to higher education and measures that are enhancing inclusion, including for people on the move, are severely in want. Quality education, in terms of content, delivery and monitoring require further strengthening, and this includes addressing financing issues.

Against this bleak picture, positive advancements are observed across countries and building on good practices as well as existing research, this publication provides policy guidance to ensure an equitable enjoyment of the right to higher education in terms of access, pursuit and completion.

States are encouraged to adopt a system-wide, equity-based, lifelong learning approach notably by ensuring the interconnectedness with other levels and forms of education. There is a need translate policy objectives into law. Sufficient and sustained funding is key, and priority should be given to vulnerable, marginalized and disadvantaged groups. States must also enhance the quality of higher education provision, including by implementing safeguards for online learning and closing the digital divide. Higher education policies must go beyond access and factor in the completion of studies and the transition to the labour market.

As UNESCO is embarking on a journey to review the international human rights framework , the publication further invites an international reflection on the notions of ‘merit’ and ‘capacity’, ‘progressive introduction of free education’ and ‘equally accessible to all’.

Higher education is a human right, and States need to take further action to ensure that this right is fully implemented.

• Read the report
• WHEC22 roundtable ‘New approaches to the right to higher education’
• Right to Education Initiative’s webpage on higher education

Related items

• Right to education
• Higher education

More on this subject

Other recent articles

The Higher Education Review

• Engineering
• Jobs and Careers
• Media and Mass Communication
• Education Consultancy
• Universities
• Editor's Column

Adapting to Change: The Top Higher Education Trends for 2024

Download now complete list of top private engineering colleges.

What is Happening to U.S. Higher Education?

By Olivia Robertson

Recent technological advancements and new players have shaken up various industries, like entertainment and transportation. Now, these same changes are affecting higher education in America. New research out of Vanderbilt Business uses Layton’s marketing systems theory to understand the disruptions of the academic system. 

“ United States Education Structure is Under Stress: Exploring the Destabilization of Academia’s System Settings ” emphasizes that while education leaders don’t directly control these changes, their decisions can impact the outcomes and structure of the U.S. higher education system. Co-authored by Jen Riley , Morgan M. Bryant , Kate Nicewicz-Scott , Amy Watson , and Tiffanie Turner-Henderson , the study aims to analyze how the U.S. higher education system deals with these disruptions. The authors discuss 3 primary power shifts influencing how education is marketed and provide a reference for academic leaders to make decisions and take action in response to these changes.

“Our work critically examines these shifts by intertwining historical perspectives with the demands of today’s evolving landscape, emphasizing the need for transformative change within higher education,” says Riley. 

What is Layton’s theory of marketing systems?

Layton’s theory of marketing systems is a framework that looks at how changes in power, technology, or societal values act as catalysts, sparking a series of events in a system. This system involves the exchange of goods, services, or ideas. Once a catalyst occurs, opportunities and threats arise, and people or institutions respond based on self-interest, mutuality, and morality. The outcome is a transformation of the marketing system, affecting offerings and how it contributes to the community’s well-being. Layton emphasizes adapting to these changes to remain relevant and influential.

The authors discuss how the American Industrial Revolution was the “technological shock” that led to the transformation of higher education into what it is today. At the turn of the 20th century, many prominent American universities were established, focusing on applying science to industry needs. Now, higher education faces another revolution marked by technological, economic, and cultural changes. These shifts question the value of the exchange between society and U.S. higher education, leading to power shifts in various aspects. This tension pushes for a change in the types of educational offerings, causing traditional institutions and degrees to lose perceived and actual value. 

“To remain relevant, higher education must evolve and adjust program offerings to fit current market needs,” says Riley. “Failure to evolve may lead to declining relevance and influence as society seeks greater value elsewhere.”

What are the governance and political influences on higher education in the United States?

Recent scandals like the ‘ Varsity Blues ‘ and partisan politics have eroded trust in college leadership with increased political influence over universities. This influence is exemplified by instances like former Senator Ben Sasse becoming president of the University of Florida amid protests. Political appointments in university boards have risen, and students’ contributions to university budgets have doubled in the past 40 years. Yet, despite reduced allocations, states maintain significant influence. Recent legislative actions target tenure , DEI initiatives , and expenditures. Supreme Court rulings have favored conservative positions, impacting affirmative action and race-conscious admissions, prompting calls to end similar programs at institutions.

Does accreditation matter in the U.S. higher education system?

Accreditation signals quality and legitimacy, particularly the AACSB designation for business schools. Maintaining this accreditation focuses heavily on faculty research, creating a disconnect with student-centric objectives. While being a great researcher doesn’t necessarily correlate with practical teaching, there is value in the research-teaching nexus, especially in experiential learning. However, institutional emphasis on research poses challenges. Public distrust in scientists has increased , impacting the perceived value of inflated tuition funding scientific research, and critics argue that research doesn’t necessarily benefit student learning, especially when faculty are juggling teaching priorities for paying students with expectations for research productivity. 

“The current structure creates a tension between resource allocation and student success,” the authors write. “Considering the looming threat of a decline in prospective students due to a shrinking population, it is crucial to prioritize student outcomes and retention.”

How does macromarketing impact the desire for higher education in the United States?

Prior research indicates one macromarketing (big-picture, economic, and societal) effect of a successful higher education marketing system is the evidence of community quality improvement. However, Americans have lost confidence in the economic benefit of higher education, questioning its payoff, affordability, and access . Recent studies indicate a declining enthusiasm for college among Gen Z, with 50% believing a college degree is unnecessary. With the national birth rate decline since the 1960s posing challenges, there aren’t enough young workers to replace retiring Baby Boomers, threatening the historically counter-cyclical nature of the economy and demand for education. And, despite a growing need for skilled workers, many Americans feel that colleges and universities are not adequately preparing graduates for the workforce.

How has competition, especially technological, affected U.S. higher education?

Google, a key player in digital marketing , introduced Career Certificates as an affordable alternative to traditional degrees, making education more widely accessible. Google partnered with universities, shifting classroom responsibilities to external entities. By collaborating with universities, Google is a curriculum provider that bridges the gap between professors’ expertise and current industry practices. This partnership shifts traditional classroom responsibilities from professors to external, for-profit entities. Google’s approach, outlined in the company’s marketing materials, encourages faculty to provide “wraparound support” to a curriculum they did not participate in creating or delivering. Similar models are adopted by other companies like Ziplines Education, formerly GreenFig , which partners with prestigious institutions to support or replace traditional education.

Guild Education , a for-profit company, brokers employer-sponsored education benefits, directing millions of adult learners to selected programs. Industry leaders like Bloomberg and Salesforce offer branded certificates, emphasizing skills over degrees. Guild Education’s influence as a power player in education is significant, directing millions of credit hours. Despite its limited partnership with less than 1% of 4-year degree-granting institutions, it manages tens of millions of credit hours, establishing itself as a significant educational power player. Its focus on employer-sponsored adult learners positions Guild Education as a disruptive force. In turn, many companies, including Google, no longer require degrees for all hiring, focusing on skills and experience, further emphasizing the significance of Guild Education and similar opportunities.

The shift toward skills-based hiring and technology implementation in education is reshaping the value and demands of higher education. In addition to the presentation of one’s skills via certificate becoming more prominent and desirable, the pandemic accelerated the shift to online learning, emphasizing the need for educators to adapt to modern tools and experiential teaching methods. Additionally, COVID-19, leading to the switch to online learning, strengthened theories that traditional classroom learning environments were no longer sufficient, leading universities to show how they can provide value to in-person students, especially given the high price tag of higher education. 

Conclusion: How do Layton’s model and industry shifts affect higher education?

The described changes place a significant responsibility on academia to make informed and strategic choices to stay relevant. Layton’s model emphasizes the need for adaptation, showcasing the unidirectional nature of the system setting arrow. Implementing simulations and modern technology may divide instructors, requiring a critical examination of traditional market system structures. Proposing innovative models that optimize self-interest, mutuality, and morality could make traditional institutions more adaptable. The suggestion of collaboration between professors and industry leaders could bridge the knowledge gap and decrease university overhead. 

“ This manuscript underscores the urgency for academia to evolve and address current challenges in a meaningful way,” says Riley.

Faculty News Featured News News Press Releases

Other Stories

Want to learn more about certificate programs at Vanderbilt Business?

10 higher ed trends to watch in 2024

Insidetrack’s yearly predictions for where higher ed is headed .

Spin the wheel, pick a number and drop the pachinko balls, it’s time to take a look at the trends on tap for higher education in 2024. With institutions across the country facing waves of change as they strive to best support their students, what are the issues, topics and trends that will be making headlines and rocking the boat throughout the year ahead? 

Trend 1. Linking education to career paths

More than ever, students (and their families) want to know that the high cost of a college education is worth it, with the guarantee of an in-demand career following close behind graduation day. 

In order for students to be better prepared to enter the job market and hit the ground running in their chosen career, it’s crucial to make sure the curriculum in courses related to their field of study teaches both the broad and specific skills they’ll need in that field. As always, more education leads to better prospects for earnings and employment. Yet for many businesses, the feeling is that too often, degrees are mostly rewards for dollars spent and time put in at college. 

Companies need employees who are skilled, knowledgeable and ready to work, ensuring crucial positions are filled and the nation has a high-quality workforce. A report from the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce notes that despite the upheaval in the job market since 2020, including the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression (caused by the COVID-19 pandemic) followed by the quickest recovery in history, one workforce trend has remained constant: the increasing need for workers to have higher levels of education in order to succeed in an ever-evolving modern economy. 

Another way of connecting education and career that’s seeing a resurgence is in the area of internships and apprenticeships and the importance of helping individuals build social capital. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the number of apprentices in both the public and private sectors rose 64 percent between 2012 and 2021 — with 27,385 registered active apprenticeship programs across the nation in 2021. After a downturn during the pandemic, internships are also flourishing as a way to provide real-world, on-the-job training in key fields to college students as part of their curriculum.

And finally, schools are beginning to develop ways of measuring the success rate for graduates of different programs as they enter the workforce. Much like how law schools post their bar passage rate — their equivalent of successful student outcome after three years of post-graduate schooling — colleges and universities are attempting to do the same through statistics showing the percentage of graduates in a given field who work in that field within a designated time frame from graduation.

Adding InsideTrack coaching at every step along your support program can help boost completion rates and prepare learners with the skills they need to thrive in their career. Learn more . 

Trend 2. Making sense of the AI explosion

By now it’s clear that the transformative power of AI has come to college campuses. Everyone agrees the technology is powerful, but no one agrees on much else… yet. A recent survey by BestColleges revealed that 56% of college students have used artificial intelligence technology to complete assignments. Concerns over this rapidly growing technology are many: plagiarism, inaccurate information, cheating on exams, and students not learning how to write their own papers or do their own work. But the exploding popularity of AI makes it impossible for colleges and universities to ignore. As a result, most schools are developing campus-wide AI strategies — both for students and for faculty. 

Chapman University, for example, has pulled together a best practices sheet using information provided from schools at the forefront of AI usage (Harvard, Stanford, UCLA and Arizona State among them), with official AI policies, as well as guidance for instructors and guidance for students. According to a report from Hanover Research and Inside Higher Ed, the biggest AI issue for many schools centers around the reliability and ethical implications of AI in an educational setting as generative AI systems like ChatGPT can lack context and accuracy. The study cites “establishing clear guidelines” as a crucial step toward harnessing the power of this burgeoning technology, and cautions that rather than implementing bans, institutions should offer guidelines and training to allow faculty to determine whether and how they integrate AI into their classrooms and coursework.

Highlighting the positive, the study lists 10 AI benefits in higher education — benefits that can encourage deeper understanding of the material over rote memorization, foster critical thinking and enhance problem-solving skills. Potential benefits include:

• Personalized learning
• Interactive learning
• Feedback and assessment
• Educational accessibility
• Academic guidance
• Academic integrity
• Efficient study tools
• Real-time query resolution
• Preparation for future careers
• Data-driven insights

The flip side of the coin is that there are, of course, concerns — including the opportunity for misuse in a variety of scenarios. While AI does indeed hold promise for enhancing learning experiences, it’s imperative to address the concerns. The Hanover/Inside Higher Ed study cites six key areas of potential challenges and inherent risks. This includes:

• Lack of transparency
• Intellectual property and copyright 
• Cybersecurity and fraud
• Sustainability

So where does this leave us? Now that the initial dystopian brouhaha is receding, many positive uses for the technology are coming to light. Forbes, for example, says that when it comes to teaching new and complex topics, AI offers “the ability to act like an infinitely patient grandmother, never rushing or giving up and going on to the next thing.” Institutions are noting that AI can be used as a powerful classroom aid to make lessons more interactive. And faculty members say the technology can help generate personalized lesson plans and save time on administrative tasks. And this is only the beginning…

Trend 3. Prioritizing mental health on campus

Think the mental health crisis among college students is easing now that the height of the pandemic is over? Think again. Rates of anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation on college campuses have never been higher. According to NEA Today, the majority of college students meet the criteria for at least one mental health problem . And while the rates of mental health problems are the same among students of all races, students of color are less likely to get treatment. 

In a 2023 study from Healthy Minds that surveyed more than 90,000 students across 133 U.S. campuses, 44 percent of students reported symptoms of depression , 37 percent said they experienced anxiety, and 15 percent said they were considering suicide — the highest number in the 15-year history of the survey. 

Students today are taking on more responsibility than ever before. But for many, the stress level has become overwhelming. In addition to the lectures, coursework and study time required by school, students are often also working (full- or part-time), taking care of children, providing caregiving for parents, and dealing with a variety of other commitments. They are spread thin — and it’s increasingly taking a toll on their mental health.

To add to the problem, counseling centers are overwhelmed, with students often waiting weeks or even months to get an appointment. What’s more, a shortage of mental health professionals, the cost of paying for services and the perceived stigma associated with seeking help for mental health are all barriers that are heightened with an influx of students seeking support. 

Brett R. Harris, PhD at the University of Albany, and her colleagues developed a set of recommendations on ways to increase college student access to and use of mental health services. This includes:

• Increasing the conversation around mental health 
• Making mental health promotion and suicide prevention a campus-wide effort
• Involving students, faculty and staff in the development and implementation of mental health campaigns, services, resources and supports
• Integrating training into academics and student life
• Making information about services and supports readily available and well communicated
• Assessing the needs of all students at the beginning of the semester via online surveys
• Collaborating with outside organizations to help expand upon limited resources

With budgets flat (or shrinking) and demand for services growing exponentially, colleges and universities across the country are training faculty, staff and peer leaders to help bridge the gap. A recent article in Time Magazine explores how colleges are getting creative to provide increased mental health services to their students.

All InsideTrack success coaching programs include an escalation option that connects learners in crisis situations beyond the classroom to our dedicated Crisis Support Services team. Using a specially developed crisis intervention model, these highly trained specialists help learners deal with everything from food and housing insecurity to domestic violence, health challenges and suicidal ideation. Learn more . 

Trend 4. Getting creative to support equity

With the Supreme Court striking down affirmative action last year, institutions nationwide are rethinking and reimagining their approach to equity and their ability to foster a diverse student body. As spring acceptance letters go out to the first class recruited in the post-affirmative action age, what are the implications ? And what are schools doing to ensure they create equal opportunities for all students? At InsideTrack, our mission is centered on equity, transforming lives and organizations while creating social change. To that end, we are actively following the innovative and creative ways schools are continuing to make diversity a key component in their recruitment efforts.

The nonprofit Urban Institute explores the future of college admissions without affirmative action .  Here are a few alternatives schools are already enacting:

• Using class-based admissions . This method gives greater weight to applicants from less affluent socioeconomic backgrounds — those who have not had the same resources and educational opportunities as wealthier students.
• Implementing targeted recruitment. Providing increased recruitment efforts — often coupled with financial aid — encourages students of color with similar qualifications as their white counterparts to apply at more selective schools.
• Pressure on legacy admissions . Many highly selective schools admit more legacy students than Black and Latinx applicants combined. A study from Opportunity Insights found that legacy applicants from wealthy families were five times more likely than other students to gain admission to an Ivy League or Ivy-caliber school. Legacy applicants from less prosperous families were three times as likely to be admitted. Ending legacy admissions could help level the playing field.
• Continuing test-free and test-optional admission policies . It’s a well-established fact that standardized tests for college admissions benefit wealthy white students the most. Removing this barrier by eliminating tests or making them optional could help schools get more students of color to apply and gain admittance.

One thing to note is that we expect that DEI programs and policies will continue to be politicized and will likely intensify during the 2024 election in November.

Trend 5. Questioning the ROI of a four-year degree

Statistics from the Education Data Initiative show that the average cost of college in the United States is $36,436 per year— a cost that has more than doubled in the 21 st century. With college costs continuing to rise, people are questioning whether the cost of a four-year degree is still worth it. Many in the public feel that higher education is struggling to meet the changing needs of individuals or the nation as a whole. In a time characterized by rapidly changing technology, more skills-based hiring and rising costs, how will higher ed leaders adapt? We believe that champions across higher education will continue to address this core challenge.

Increasingly, when talk turns to college tuition, the focus is on the return on investment (ROI) — an issue that’s only growing as students fear attending school will leave them saddled with debt for years to come. Highlights from a 2023 Wall Street Journal-National Opinion Research Center poll show that roughly 56 percent of respondents said college graduates leave school without necessary job skills burdened by high amounts of debt — a number representing a new low in higher education confidence. The research also found that the age group with the greatest skepticism for college degrees comes from the youngest age bracket, adults ages 18 to 34. The public perception is that while job needs have changed dramatically and continue to rapidly evolve, higher ed is slow to catch up to this trend and needs to shift coursework, majors and mindset in order to honestly be able to emphasize (and show) the value of a four-year degree. 

Opinions are one thing. But what do the numbers actually say? According to a report from the Institute for Higher Education Policy, a college degree still provides value for about 93 percent of students who graduate. Their analysis shows that for the majority of students — especially those attending a public college or university — earning a college degree puts them in a better financial situation than their peers who did not attend college. The report goes on to say that approximately 2,400 schools, responsible for enrollment of 18 million undergrads nationwide, reach a minimum level of value that makes the cost of college worth the investment. 

Going one step further, the Postsecondary Value Commission uses public data to estimate the number of colleges that provide a minimum economic return . The goal of this diverse group of college leaders, policymakers, researchers, advocates and students is to answer the question, “What is college worth?” Data from the University of Texas System shows that 15 years after graduation, most students who earn degrees achieve economic mobility and median earnings in their field of study, while those who didn’t attend college or complete their degree struggle to do so. 

Beyond the numbers, the Postsecondary Value Commission also provides a list of actionable steps for institutions, as well as for state and federal policymakers and for students and families. Colleges and universities, for example, can create clearer academic pathways and credit transfer policies. They can also better align institutional aid resources to focus on students with the greatest financial need. Students and families, on the other hand, can ask questions about average completion rate and time-to-credential, average expected earnings, and debt-to-earnings ratio for graduates.

Trend 6. Paving the path to success for adult learners

Numbers from the National Center for Education Statistics show that adults over the age of 25 represent roughly 35 percent of higher education enrollment — and those nearly six-and-a-half million learners have different needs than their straight-out-of-high-school traditional student counterparts. Adult learners are often more likely to pursue their education online. They’re more likely to be caring for children. And they seek out schools that offer flexible class times to make programs more accessible. Yet it’s become increasingly clear that existing higher ed structures and systems are just not well-suited to properly serving adult learners — something that’s now beginning to change.

The Oregon Student Child Care Grant Program helps parents enrolled in college to obtain safe, dependable care. This long-term grant can be used at any nonprofit public or private college or university in the state. Through this opportunity, children are well cared for, allowing parents to attend school, complete coursework and have time to study. As long as the student parent completes the necessary credit hours each year and maintains satisfactory academic progress as defined by the school, the grant is good for up to six years or until the student graduates, whichever comes first.

In North Carolina, the Belk Center for Community College Leadership and Research handbook showcases real-time, on-the-ground information to provide actionable insights on what’s working to bring adult learners back to college to complete their programs. This includes everything from making sure your teams are cross-trained and eager to lean into new methods of support, to practicing over-communication, allowing adult learners to work ahead, and keeping care at the center of the work. Direct coaching, as well as coaching training and development , have played a key role in the ongoing success of this multi-layered initiative.

Efforts like these, and many others, play a critical role in not only helping adult learners achieve their goals, but also in bringing some of the 40 million learners with some college, no credential back to school to complete their programs. Taking a holistic view of the adult learner's needs is a must. 

Large-scale Reconnect to Complete initiatives help states and institutions support learners who have some college, but no credential to return to finish their schooling. Find out how different programs across the country are using coaching to help learners re-enroll and complete. Learn more .

Trend 7. Putting staff and faculty burnout on the front burner

First identified as an occupational issue in the 1970s, it wasn’t until 2019 that the World Health Organization finally included “burnout” in its International Classification of Diseases , describing it as “resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed.” But what, specifically, are the root causes of burnout? Researchers Christina Maslach of the University of California, Berkeley, Susan Jackson of Rutgers, and Michael Leiter of Deakin University attribute burnout to one or more of six main causes:

• Unsustainable workload
• Perceived lack of control
• Insufficient rewards for efforts
• Lack of a supportive community
• Lack of fairness
• Mismatched values and skills

For faculty and staff at the nation’s colleges and universities, the burnout is real — and it’s been growing steadily worse. For years, the mantra has been “do more with less” — less time, less funding, less pay. Then came COVID-19 and an unprecedented, highly stressful global pandemic. And while solutions offered often include things like exercise, yoga, stress relief workshops and better sleep habits, these are self-care stopgaps that put the onus of burnout on the faculty and staff, rather than addressing the institutional causes behind the stress. And as burnout among academics has continued to grow unchecked, the reality now is that many in the field are leaving the world of higher education for employment in other sectors. 

In “ The Great Resignation Update ,” a study from employee well-being organization Limeade, the number one reason job changers left their previous employers was burnout, cited by 40% of survey respondents. "Burnout is especially insidious for employers because it affects your most engaged, highest-performing employees," said Jessi Cast, a researcher with Limeade. "You can't burn out if you don't care in the first place." This rings especially true for college staff and faculty, people who dedicate their careers to serving students for the common good. 

Employee burnout on college campuses needs to be addressed in concrete and meaningful ways. Identifying career paths and providing student support staff with additional training, for example, can lead to greater empowerment as well as retention benefits. A report from the American Council on Education explores a variety of ways that schools can address burnout through cultural change — including building jobs around the strengths of an employee, limiting communication during non-working hours, offering competitive pay (including cost of living adjustments), and reclassifying positions to create a less bottom-heavy organization.

Trend 8. Understanding financial aid obstacles in the midst of FAFSA overhaul

From years of coaching college students, we know that finances are a major obstacle — and receiving grants, scholarships and student loans for college all starts with submitting the FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid). The existing form has long been criticized for being so complicated. According to USA Today, the new form, initially scheduled to debut in October of 2023, was overhauled to be much shorter (36 questions vs. 108), to allow users to transfer tax data directly from the IRS, and to use new formulas designed to grant more aid to more students. Unfortunately, not releasing the new form until December 31 has left students and schools in the lurch for upcoming terms.

What’s more, the Washington Post reports that the Education Department failed to update guidelines used to calculate financial aid eligibility. Congress directed the department to raise the amount of income protected across all categories — but that didn’t happen. Though the error has been flagged, the Education Department says it’s too late to make the change for this year. As a result, students will receive less scholarship and grant money for the 2024-2025 school year. Experts say that dependent students and their families will see anywhere from $6,000 to more than $10,000 of additional income factored into their calculations when it shouldn’t be, thus reducing their eligibility for financial aid. 

What’s more, the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) projects that approximately 2.1 million students who could be eligible for Pell Grants under the new law may miss out because the inflation adjustment wasn’t activated. This same index is also used to determine eligibility for work-study and subsidized loans, and by states and institutions to award scholarship and grant monies. 

The timing of the delayed roll-out adds stress to already overwhelmed financial aid offices — and confusion to students and their families. In recent years, the FAFSA has been available online on October 1. But bumping that date to December 31 shortens the time that students have to complete the form and meet state priority filing deadlines. 

This greatly compressed time-frame could result in students missing out on much-needed aid. The National College Attainment Network (NCAN) cites completing the FAFSA as one of the best predictors of whether a high school senior will go to college — with those who do being 84% more likely to immediately enroll. This same organization warned that the tighter timelines for form completion coupled with less time for schools to process and determine aid amounts “could result in lower FAFSA completion and college enrollment than in previous years.”

Do the learners you support understand the financial aid process? To help you answer this question, we’ve compiled a robust list of 10 things your students should know about financial aid — along with helpful tips on how you can support them. Learn more .

Trend 9. Making a case for liberal arts

It’s the quintessential higher ed Catch-22: While traditional “liberal arts” majors are on the chopping block at schools across the country, the 2023 Most In-Demand Skills List from LinkedIn shows that the soft skills students gain from liberal arts courses fill more than half the slots on this yearly list. So what does the future hold for liberal arts education? And how does this factor into job and career success post-graduation?

According to an article in the New York Times, economists have argued for years over whether a liberal arts degree is worth the price of a college education. To that end, The Hechinger Report notes that several public institutions — including Iowa State University, North Dakota State University, the University of Alaska and the University of Kansas — have each announced or proposed cuts to liberal arts programs , largely in the humanities. 

Which brings us to Mississippi. Per the Times article, Shad White, the Mississippi state auditor, released a report suggesting that the state should invest more in college degree programs that could “improve the value they provide to both taxpayers and graduates.” White cites placing more focus on engineering and business programs, and less on liberal arts majors like women’s studies and literature. The reasoning? “Those graduates not only earn less, but they are also less likely to stay in Mississippi.” 

This shift has been happening for decades. In the 1970s, for example, education, history and social sciences were the most popular majors. Today, business is the most popular degree at 19 percent of undergraduate degrees, with social sciences now at just eight percent. In the NY Times article, Jeffrey Cohen, the dean of humanities at Arizona State University, says he finds this shift short-sighted, explaining that liberal arts are not only a pathway toward a job, but toward a lifetime of career reinvention. “Our students are living in a time when the career that they’re trained for is not likely to be the career that they’re going to be following 10 years later.” And studying the humanities teaches students how to be nimble.

Ironically, hiring managers and corporate HR staff say that finding prospective employees with the right mix of soft skills — also known as essential or employability skills — is extremely valuable in today’s constantly shifting job market. These essential skills include everything from time management, motivation, communication and leadership skills to reliability, adaptability, resilience, and being able to work on a team. A Dell Technologies report, in partnership with Institute for the Future, asked experts from around the world to weigh in on a variety of education and career topics . Some 56 percent say that schools need to teach how to learn rather than what to learn to better prepare students for jobs that don’t exist yet. And that’s precisely what liberal arts classes do.

Trend 10. Focusing on more meaningful metrics

For years, institutions have used metrics such as enrollment and completion rates to measure success. But what about outcomes that are more meaningful to students? 

• Did you actually learn from the courses you took? 
• Did you gain adequate skills? 
• Did the coursework you completed connect to your future career? 
• Do you feel prepared for a career in your chosen field?  

An analysis performed by Strada Education Network explores how incorporating alumni perceptions into the mix helps increase the understanding of success beyond the basic measurement of degree completion. Findings from this report represent one of the first times where economic and personal fulfillment outcomes are integrated into the metrics to better express the full benefits of post-secondary education. Among the key findings:

• Students’ education goals encompass learning, career and personal growth. More than 9 in 10 alumni reported strong learning outcomes.
• At least three-quarters of alumni experienced one of these three post-graduation outcomes: an earnings benefit, feeling their education was worth the cost, or achieving their goals. Half realized all three outcomes. Yet women, first-generation students and alumni of color were less likely to experience the benefits.
• Graduates say their professors and courses were very valuable to them, but note that the experiences and support connecting education to career opportunities were somewhat lacking.
• Alumni who reported quality experiences connecting their education to career preparation as students earned more money and were significantly more likely to agree that their education was worth the cost and helped them achieve their goals.
• Alumni who believe they developed in-demand professional skills in school are more likely to believe their education helped them achieve their goals.

Even though this is one of the first-of-its-kind in-depth studies, ramifications from the results are already being felt. Policymakers and funders, for example, can invest in systems that more consistently and comprehensively measure graduation outcomes. And college and university leaders can use this as a springboard to measure outcomes beyond completion, tapping into the insights uncovered to guide institutional improvements. 

If you want to see how these trends evolve or just keep up with higher ed insights like this on a monthly basis, be sure and subscribe to our newsletter, the InsideTrack Advancer.

Related resources

Access our on-demand webinar: Empowering Teams, Transforming Outcomes

How quality coaching helps learners connect education pathways to career success

Illinois Central College transformed their student support — and now they’re re-enrolling hundreds of learners

Coaching solutions proven to advance all learners.

Whether you’re looking to help students persist through completion or to improve career outcomes for job seekers and employees, our holistic coaching solutions can help you achieve meaningful outcomes.

Re-enrollment

Career Readiness

Reskilling, Upskilling & Advancing

Coaching Development & Training

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Construction begins on A.R.T.’s new home in Allston

AI, new technologies, and ‘courage to fail’ mark IT Summit

Presidential task forces deliver preliminary recommendations to Garber

“Revitalizing Democracy” was one of six symposia included in the inauguration celebration. It featured moderator Guy-Uriel Charles (from left), Archon Fung, Jill Lepore, Daniel Ziblatt, Yanilda Gonzalez, and Danielle Allen.

Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer

Taking aim at global solutions

Christina Pazzanese, Samantha Laine Perfas, and Liz Mineo

Harvard Staff Writers

Panels examine challenges ahead: riven democracies, biomedical advances, raging inequity, climate change, harnessing AI, role of academy

As democracies around the world grow increasingly divided with the rise of various anti-democratic forces and nationalist-populist movements, a group of Harvard scholars gathered Friday morning to assess the state of democracy in the U.S. and propose ways to revitalize it to ensure it best serves 21st-century America.

The event, titled “Revitalizing Democracy,” was one of six academic symposia that took place Friday across the University as part of President Claudine Gay’s inaugural celebration. Gay, a political scientist, has called “faltering” democracies one of the most pressing challenges the world faces. She said that seeking ways Harvard can join with the global community to find solutions is a priority for the University.

During a discussion at the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum at Harvard Kennedy School led by moderator Guy-Uriel Charles, Charles Ogletree Jr. Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, faculty panelists identified some of the difficulties American democracy faces today.

Among the issues that panelists cited are an outdated reliance on institutions like the Electoral College, the U.S. Senate, and the filibuster that permit a minority to thwart the will of the majority, and foreign actors and nation-states targeting the American electorate with threats and false information designed to widen political and cultural divisions and weaken consensus on democratic principles.

Many of the problems have been gradually emerging over time amid changes in population through immigration, shifts to a global economy, and the rise of digital technology.

Danielle Allen, James Bryant Conant University Professor, and director of the Allen Lab for Democracy Renovation, said passage of immigration laws in the 1960s, the emergence of social media and structural reforms to both political parties in the 1950s have resulted in “unintended consequences” that affect our democracy today.

Some of the panelists noted that the country has only been a true multicultural democracy since the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965, while the Constitution, written by and for a white minority eligible to vote, has remained largely untouched since the Civil Rights era.

The “outsized” and very different experience that communities of color often have with policing compared to white communities fuels misperceptions about the state and crime and hardens fear-driven partisanship, said Yanilda González, assistant professor of public policy at the Kennedy School.

The panel offered ideas for how the Harvard community, particularly faculty and students, can start to dismantle these barriers and strengthen democracy so that it more fairly and equitably serves the changing America populace.

Archon Fung, Winthrop Laflin McCormack Professor of Citizenship and Self-Government and director of the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at HKS, said research has shown that frequent face-to-face interactions between people with very different political views reduces polarization and will foster a “culture of democracy” in which disagreement is welcome and partisanship is not, so focusing more effort on bridging political gaps at the local or state level is critical.

Jill Lepore, David Woods Kemper ’41 Professor of American History and Harvard College Professor, suggested an amendment to the Constitution that would impose term limits on Supreme Court justices at some future, mutually agreed upon date, could be an effective way to eliminate lifetime appointments, which partisans on both sides agree in principle runs counter to democratic practice, and to demonstrate that changes to the Constitution are necessary and possible.

Academic institutions, like Harvard, ought to begin working now to identify the models that can best move U.S. political institutions forward so that they truly support our multicultural democracy, said Daniel Ziblatt, Eaton Professor of the Science of Government at Harvard University and director of the Center for European Studies.

“The ideas are already there,” Ziblatt said. They just require time and attention to refine them so they’re ready to be implemented when the time comes, much like was done following World War II to establish institutions like the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund.

“If we just sort of hold off until the moment is ‘realistic,’ then we won’t be ready when the moment comes.”

“Innovating for Impact: Science for the Mind and Body in the 21st Century”

Another panel, moderated by Amy Wagers, the Forst Family Professor of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology and the co-chair of the Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology, discussed Harvard’s biomedical research and the field’s untapped potential in improving health outcomes for billions around the world.

“I really wanted to highlight the many facets of innovation that are needed to realize the full potential of biological discoveries, spanning from the first arc of an idea to the experiments in their early days to the discoveries — and ultimately their application — in the real world,” Wagers said.

And the first step, all agreed, was to be unafraid to take leaps.

“We need to take big risks to solve hard problems,” said Kara McKinley, one of the panelists and an assistant professor at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute. McKinley leads a lab that seeks to advance regenerative medicine by studying a repair mechanism in the uterus that may offer insights into how we can harness natural processes to heal wounds. “Because in the end, this is really the goal, to create cures and to do science that is in service to humankind,” she said.

Moderator Amy Wagers (at podium) introduces panelists Kara McKinley (from left), Nadine Gaab, Irene Faravelli, Arlene Sharpe, and Amitabh Chandra at “Innovating for Impact: Science for the Mind and Body in the 21st Century.”

Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer

During the event, panelists engaged with the attendees, asking questions and encouraging them to discuss ideas with the people seated next to them.

Arlene Sharpe is the Kolokotrones University Professor and chair of the Department of Immunology at Harvard Medical School. Her lab focuses on whether we can train our own immune cells to better fight infection and cancer.

Sharpe played a video of T cells delivering “the kiss of death” to cancer cells. She turned to the audience and said, “I could watch this all day,” eliciting chuckles around the room.

“One of the most exciting things about being at Harvard is the collaboration,” said Sharpe, who is also a member of the Broad Institute and the leader of the Cancer Immunology Program at the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center. “One of the things that kept me here all these years is the ability to work with people. Wherever my science takes me, there are wonderful collaborations that develop that enable us to work together.”

Other panelists included Nadine Gaab, an associate professor in the Graduate School of Education who specializes in developmental cognitive neuroscience as it relates to learning disabilities; Irene Faravelli, a neurologist and postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology; and Amitabh Chandra, an economist and the Henry and Allison McCance Family Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School.

During the Q&A portion of the event, all panelists agreed that more investment in the broader science community is needed if we want to address some of the world’s most pressing health issues — and not just a greater commitment of dollars, but human investment.

“The impediment to missing innovations is no longer capital,” said Chandra, who is also the Ethel Zimmerman Wiener Professor of Public Policy and Director of Health Policy Research at Harvard Kennedy School of Government. “[B]ut the people who are capable of discovering them are not entering the life sciences.” Some of them, he noted, never make it to an institution of higher education because they lack the necessary economic and educational opportunities.

Harvard, according to Chandra, produces nearly 4 percent of the world’s basic science. As a significant producer of research, the University has a role to play in equipping current and future generations of scientists to further advance the boundaries of knowledge, especially scientists from historically underrepresented backgrounds.

“There is really an urgent need to increase the diversity of people who do science to make science look like the people that our science seeks to serve,” said McKinley.

During the “Challenging Inequality in the US” panel discussion, Peter Blair shared his research on expanding labor market mobility for Americans who don’t have bachelor’s degrees.

Niles Singer/Harvard Staff Photographer

“Challenging Inequality in the US: New Ideas and Approaches”

Panelists who took part in an academic symposium on inequality in the U.S. urged the audience to fight inequality from their own trenches, in schools, neighborhoods, and their local associations.

Scholars can do research, compile and analyze data, and come up with theories about inequality. But, they noted, their work needs to be accompanied by the efforts of the community.

“Ideas matter for advancing real-world change,” said Sara Bleich , professor of public health policy at the T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who was the event’s moderator. “But this work requires collaboration.”

The key, said Crystal Yang , Bennett Boskey Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, is to look outside research institutions and go into the real world, and commit to work following truth and science.

Panelists shared with the audience how they became interested in studying inequality and, in some cases, how their personal life stories influenced their paths. They also talked about the policies and the practices they would like to see to advance their research.

Peter Blair , assistant professor of education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, studies labor market discrimination, and the ways in which education can help workers who lack degrees achieve upper mobility. Blair spoke about his work with other researchers and policymakers to expand labor market mobility for the 70 million Americans who don’t have bachelor’s degrees.

“Research matters,” said Blair. “The way that we see people matters. The lens of thinking about who’s not in the room matters also. One of the phenomenal things about being at Harvard and specifically at the Ed School is that we value the basic research policy and its impact on practice.”

Robert Sampson , the Woodford L. and Ann A. Flowers University Professor, who studies crime, criminal justice, and urban inequality, spoke about the role of universities in research to promote social changes by including the voices of community members and understanding their lived experiences.

Imani Perry , who studies the history of Black thought, art, and imagination created in resistance to slavery and oppression, made a special plea to the audience.

“Identify an issue of injustice or inequality … [and devote the next two years] to spending some time on a regular basis on this issue,” said Perry, Henry A. Morss Jr. and Elisabeth W. Morss Professor of Studies of Women, Gender, and Sexuality and of African and African American Studies, and Carol K. Pforzheimer Professor, Harvard Radcliffe Institute.

“Even if it’s just those of us who are in this room, that would have a remarkably transformative effect. What we learn when we do scholarly research is that it’s the slow work that is the most transformative work. The same is true for social movement.”

“Confronting the Impact of Climate Change: Building Resilience and New Solutions” featured panelist Steven Wofsy (from left), Karen Thornber, Laura Schifter, Tamarra James-Todd, and Stephen Ansolabehere. Panelist Claire Leibowicz shared her insights on “Harnessing Generative Artificial Intelligence for Learning, Teaching, and Working.”

Photos by Jon Chase and Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographers

There were three other panels marking the inauguration of Gay. Stephen Ansolabehere, Tamarra James-Todd, Laura Schifter, Karen Thornber, and Steven Wofsy discussed how leaders and communities can confront the far-reaching effects of climate change; Amanda Claybaugh, Isaac Kohane, Karim Lakhani, and Claire Leibowicz examined the potential for generative AI to transform labor and education; and Durba Mitra, Megan Panzano, Matthew Potts, and Louis Menand traded ideas about the role of academia in the face of new tech and global challenges.

Share this article

Robin Kelsey (from left), Matthew Potts, and Durba Mitra listen to an audience member’s question at the discussion, “Looking Ahead: The Future of the Academy.”

More like this

Gay sees in Harvard the courage to change the world

Cloudy, wet, and muddy, but mood was sunny, warm

You might like.

David E. and Stacey L. Goel Center for Creativity & Performance to include interconnected, adaptable multiuse spaces 

Tech leaders encourage culture of innovation

Co-chairs of initiatives to combat anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, and anti-Palestinian bias and antisemitism outline recommendations for near-term action — with final reports expected in the fall

When should Harvard speak out?

Institutional Voice Working Group provides a roadmap in new report

Had a bad experience meditating? You're not alone.

Altered states of consciousness through yoga, mindfulness more common than thought and mostly beneficial, study finds — though clinicians ill-equipped to help those who struggle

College sees strong yield for students accepted to Class of 2028  

Financial aid was a critical factor, dean says

Ten Major Issues Facing Higher Education Institutions In 2023

Contributor.

The last few years have been eventful and, at times, difficult ones for institutions of higher education. Institutions have been deeply impacted by issues ranging from the COVID-19 pandemic, to debates over free speech, to changes in immigration law, and to the ever-increasing pace of technological change, to name but a few. These impacts have been felt by institutions in numerous ways, including through increased legal risk and litigation. But notwithstanding all that has happened, 2023 may be one of the most impactful years for higher education in recent memory. Some of the issues we present below represent challenges for institutions of higher education while others represent opportunities. But all of these issues are important, interesting, and worthy of careful consideration as the year progresses.

#1 Race-Conscious Admissions

The Supreme Court is expected to decide two lawsuits challenging race-conscious admissions policies at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) in June 2023. The petitioner in both cases, Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), alleged that Asian-American applicants were denied undergraduate admission because of race-conscious admissions programs that benefit certain minority groups but disadvantage Asian Americans. The Court's decision could overturn 40 years of precedent—including Bakke , Grutter , and Fisher — permitting the consideration of race in admissions for the purpose of furthering student body diversity. 1

While oral argument in November 2022 reflected a sharply divided court, the conservative majority appeared prepared to overrule at least significant parts of Grutter and thus prohibit the explicit consideration of race in higher education admissions. Such a decision would obviously mark a sea change for admissions policies and would be one of the most significant court decisions regarding higher education in decades. Because the Supreme Court's decisions in these cases will likely not come out before June 2023, colleges and universities should be able to largely complete this year's admissions cycle in accord with the Court's existing precedent. Nonetheless, institutions of higher education should be prepared for the need to reformulate policies before the next admissions cycle to comply with the Court's forthcoming decisions.

To read more on this issue, please click here .

#2 Artificial Intelligence

The exponential rate of development in AI poses challenges and opportunities for colleges and universities. The use of AI technology, particularly AI-based facial recognition, has become commonplace for remote assessment proctoring due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and its use is likely to grow. Used in this manner, AI can be a useful means of stemming academic misconduct.

On the other hand, the growth of AI presents substantial challenges, too. For example, institutions have already faced suit under statutes such as the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act for capturing of students' biometric information, including through use of online remote proctoring tools. 2 Moreover, facial recognition technology, including AI-based proctoring software, is better at detecting light-skinned people than dark-skinned people and better at detecting men than women, raising issues of discrimination and equity. 3 Students with accessibility needs, learning disabilities, neurodivergence, or mental health conditions may also be at risk for discrimination by AI proctoring systems, as may transgender students. 4

Recent well-publicized developments in generative AI—algorithms, such as ChatGPT, that can be used to create new content, including text, audio, code, images, and video—will require institutions of higher education to consider how to address AI use in assessments like essay writing and adjust academic integrity policies to address such technology. And the proliferation of generative AI will also raise copyright questions for institutions of higher education. Courts will soon consider the "fair use" of input data—i.e., the training data that is ingested and used by AI algorithms. 5 As owners of tremendous amounts of intellectual property, colleges and universities will have to consider how best to protect their data and other intellectual property.

#3 Immigration: DACA Under Threat (Again)

Once again, colleges and universities will be forced to confront significant challenges related to immigration in 2023. The most high-profile issue remains the ongoing challenge to the legality of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Originally brought in 2018, the lawsuit by Texas and several other states seeks to end the DACA program. 6 It is being litigated in the Southern District of Texas before the same district court that ended the DAPA program during the Obama administration. 7

The federal district court and Fifth Circuit have already signaled that they believe DACA is unlawful. 8 They are currently evaluating whether the rule promulgated by the Biden administration to formalize the DACA program alters that legal calculus. 9 The litigation is proceeding in the district court, on remand from the Fifth Circuit, but a decision is anticipated later this year.

If the district court finds that the codified rule is unlawful, the temporary reprieve given to existing DACA recipients could end, subjecting hundreds of thousands of existing DACA recipients to removal and threatening their ability to work legally in the United States.

Given the importance of the DACA program to colleges and universities, this is litigation that schools will want to follow closely as it continues to work its way through the federal courts. And should the courts ultimately end the DACA program, universities will likely play an important role in the compelling push for a legislative solution, which at that point may be the Dreamers' only option.

#4 Antitrust Scrutiny for Institutions and Athletic Conferences

The NCAA, conferences, and institutions of higher education will continue to respond to the Court's ruling in NCAA v. Alston , 10 which held that certain NCAA restrictions on education-related benefits for student-athletes violated federal antitrust laws. For example, in In re College Athlete NIL Litigation , a potential class of football players, men's basketball players, women's basketball players, and other Division I athletes are challenging the NCAA's former NIL ban and current NIL rules as violative of antitrust laws. 11 Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is currently pending, and the case is set for trial in mid-2024. At the same time, although the Court in Alston left the conferences free to impose many of their own restrictions on student-athlete benefits, some have speculated that antitrust concerns may come to the fore in light of the continued, and perhaps expanded, dominance of the SEC and the Big Ten conference. 12, 13

In addition, ongoing litigation in the Northern District of Illinois raises questions related to a former statutory antitrust exemption, called Section 568, and financial aid methodologies used by institutions across the country. The case, Corzo et al. v. Brown University, et al. , is currently proceeding through discovery. 14

#5: College Athletics

The coming year will likely bring numerous important changes related to college athletics. For one, in Johnson v. NCAA , 15 the Third Circuit will rule on whether student-athletes can constitute "employees" under the FLSA. 16 The Seventh and Ninth Circuits have already considered the question and ruled that student-athletes cannot be deemed employees, so a contrary ruling by the Third Circuit would create a circuit split, which could elevate the issue to the Supreme Court. 17

Meanwhile, in the 18 months since the NCAA began allowing college athletes to make money off their names, images, and likenesses (NIL), 32 states have passed legislation to set rules for this process. 18 Given the variation across this "patchwork" of legislation, there have been calls for Congress to pass a uniform federal law that would even the playing field amongst all colleges and universities. So far, none of the bills introduced have made it to the floor for debate, but this will be a topic to watch in 2023. 19

Ongoing litigation over concussions in college sports is another issue likely to make news in 2023. In November 2022, a jury in Los Angeles County found the NCAA was not responsible in a wrongful death action brought by the estate of Brian Gee, a former USC football player whose death was allegedly caused by CTE. 20 But this trial is just the beginning; there are a number of other concussion cases against the NCAA working their way through state courts around the country, starting with a trial this February in Indiana. 21

#6: New Title IX Rules

In 2023, the Department of Education is expected to promulgate its highly anticipated rule clarifying the scope of Title IX protections and revising processes for handling Title IX grievances. Based on the Department's notice of proposed rulemaking, the rule is likely to make several key changes.

As to the scope of Title IX's substantive guarantees, the new rule will clarify that Title IX protects against discrimination based on sex-based stereotypes, sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy. And the rule plans to restore the longstanding standard for when sex discrimination liability is triggered: harassment must be "severe, pervasive, or objectively offensive." (This standard had been abandoned by the Trump administration in its 2020 regulations in favor of a requirement that harassment be "severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive.") The new rule's revised definition means that a single instance of sex harassment could give rise to a Title IX violation if the incident is sufficiently severe or objectively offensive (such as an assault). The new rule will also clarify Title IX's coverage for conduct that occurs off-campus. In particular, it is expected to reverse the Trump administration's policy that study abroad programs are not included.

As to the procedures universities must use to respond to and adjudicate Title IX claims, the new rule will return the standard of proof for sex discrimination to the familiar "preponderance of the evidence" standard, meaning it is more likely than not that the alleged conduct occurred. This standard had been the express federal policy dating back to the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, but the Trump administration abandoned it in 2020 for the heightened "clear and convincing evidence" standard. In reversing the Trump administration's approach, the new rule may leave universities some flexibility; if schools use the "clear and convincing" standard for all comparable disciplinary proceedings (including complaints alleging other forms of discrimination), then they will be permitted to use that heightened standard for Title IX complaints, too.

More broadly, the new rule will embrace a framework for adjudicating Title IX complaints that takes account of universities' different environments, resources, and needs—reversing the one-size-fits-all approach of the Trump administration's procedural requirements. Especially noteworthy, universities are expected to be allowed to return to a single-investigator model, a practice banned by the Trump-era regulations. That change will, in turn, have downstream effects, including that universities will no longer be required to hold live hearings to evaluate evidence; however, they must have in place a process to evaluate witness credibility through live testimony where desirable and must afford the parties equal opportunity to present and respond to relevant evidence. The new rule will also roll back the Trump administration's requirement that cross-examination be available to the parties. That said, the Department is likely to allow universities to use cross-examination if they so choose. Finally, the new rule is expected to reiterate principles of evenhandedness and a commitment to fair process. In particular, it is likely to mandate that universities withhold disciplinary action any accused person unless and until it determines that sex discrimination has occurred.

#7 Department of Education Office of Civil Rights Complaints

The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is tasked with enforcing civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age in programs that receive Department of Education funding. Complaints may be filed with the OCR by anyone who believes that an institution receiving federal financial assistance has discriminated against someone on these prohibited bases. Over the course of the 2022 fiscal year, the Office of Civil Rights received nearly 19,000 complaints, more than doubling the number received in 2021 and surpassing the record 16,000 complaints received in 2016. 22 Although the Office has not yet released its annual report, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon spoke with The New York Times about the upward trend, noting that the jump in the number of complaints "reflects confidence in the Office of Civil Rights as a place to seek redress." 23 In its most recent annual report, which correctly predicted that 2022 would be a record-breaking year in the number of complaints filed, the Office acknowledged that "addressing the rising number of civil rights complaints will be challenging" given staffing limitations. 24 The Office has not provided any statement to suggest the uptick in complaints will stall in 2023.

Notably, in recent years, a small number of individuals have filed a large number of OCR complaints. 25 For example, in 2017, 23 percent of the total cases were filed by three people. 26 One individual, Mark Perry, Professor Emeritus of Economics at University of Michigan – Flint, has filed hundreds of complaints, including some as recently as December 2022 against programs designed to support minorities and other historically disadvantaged groups. 27 The prevalence of frequent complainants, too, shows no sign of slowing.

#8: Challenges to Faculty Diversity Initiatives

This past year saw an increase not only in suits challenging universities' student diversity initiatives, but also in suits seeking to invalidate faculty diversity initiatives. Notably, America First Legal, a conservative legal organization, 28 has sued Texas A&M University for its fellowship program seeking to hire faculty "from underrepresented minority groups" in order to "move the structural composition of its faculty towards parity with that of the State of Texas." 29 The plaintiff, Richard Lowery, is a white professor at UT Austin who sued, alleging that he represented a class of "white and Asian men who stand 'able and ready' to apply for faculty appointments at Texas A&M." 30

Lowery poses new potential risks for universities, not just because many universities may similarly seek to foster diversity among their faculties, 31 but also because the plaintiff's decision to sue under Title VI (addressing discrimination in institutions receiving federal funding) rather than Title VII (addressing employment discrimination) potentially presents novel legal questions. The use of Title VI, however, also provides universities with strong defenses against these claims. Universities may argue that disgruntled job applicants do not fall within the ambit of Title VI's intended protections, as they are not the intended beneficiaries of the federal funds. They may also argue that a Title VI claim requires that the federal financial assistance have the "primary objective of ... providing employment," which is not the case with most of the federal assistance universities receive. 32 Texas A&M has raised these defenses in its motion to dismiss the suit, although the court has not yet ruled on the motion. The district court's receptivity to these novel arguments could determine whether suits like this one proliferate in the coming months.

#9: A New, GOP-Controlled House of Representatives

Higher educational institutions should brace themselves for a host of challenges and scrutiny likely to be presented by the new, GOP-controlled House of Representatives. Universities should be prepared to receive information requests from several House committees—the Committee on Education and the Workforce, the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, and the new "Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party."

Representative Virginia Foxx (R-NC), Chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, recently announced her intent to launch "vigorous and sustained oversight" of the Department of Education, 33 renewed demands for investigation and briefing on free speech at colleges and universities, 34 and listed among her priorities "stopping Biden's radical changes to federal student loans." 35

Meanwhile, Representative James Comer (R-KY), Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, sent a letter to the University of Pennsylvania on January 18 demanding a wide range of information purportedly related to "President Biden's recent mishandling of classified information." 36 The letter sets forth allegations of improper influence of the Biden administration by both UPenn and China, and demands documents and communications related to donations to UPenn originating from China, efforts to solicit donations for the Penn Biden Center (a think tank affiliated with UPenn), and all persons with access to or who had visited the Penn Biden Center. 37

The new Select Committee on China will be chaired by Representative Mike Gallagher (R-WI), though House Speaker Kevin McCarthy vowed that the committee would not be partisan and that it would focus on issues such as bringing jobs and supply chains back from China and securing intellectual property. 38 It remains to be seen whether this committee will put university funding issues in its crosshairs.

Separate from potential inquiries launched by these committees, other challenges could be presented by the mere fact of a divided Congress. For instance, a divided Congress is unlikely to pass a budget doubling the amount of the Pell Grant from $6,500 to $13,000 (which most involved with higher education agree is much needed) or to fund the scientific research part of the CHIPS and Science Act. 39 Medical research funding could also face sharp cuts if House Republicans are able to fulfill their promise to decrease spending to 2022 levels. 40

#10: Student Debt Relief

In two cases, Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown , the Supreme Court will hear challenges to the legality of the Department of Education's student debt relief plan. While these decisions may not directly impact universities, they could meaningfully expand or contract the Department of Education's authority to change financial assistance programs by rule, and regardless will undoubtedly affect students and alumni in ways that could be felt on campus.

Last year, the Biden administration announced that borrowers earning less than $125,000 (or $250,000 if married and filing taxes jointly) were eligible to receive either $10,000 or $20,000 in debt forgiveness on non-commercially held loans. 41 Millions of federal borrowers are expected benefit from this program. 42 Plaintiffs in these two cases argue that the Biden administration failed to follow the proper procedures when enacting the policies, that the Secretary of Education lacks statutory authority to implement such a program, and that the program was arbitrary and capricious. 43 The Department of Education claimed the legal authority to implement this debt-relief program under the HEROES Act, 44 which authorizes the Secretary to "waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial assistance programs" under Title IV "as the Secretary deems necessary in connection with ... a national emergency." 45 But the plaintiffs in these suits—both private individuals and a collection of states opposed to the program—maintain that the Secretary cannot simply wipe away millions of dollars in debt through executive rulemaking, and instead require express congressional authorization.

Both the private individuals and the states face threshold challenges to their suits, such as whether they can show injury from the program. But should the Court reach the merits of the case, its decision could have serious ramifications for the Department of Education's broader authority to modify financial assistance programs to meet changing needs—not to mention major financial consequences for millions of university alumni. If the Court requires more explicit authorization from Congress, for example, the Department of Education's ability to provide meaningful assistance to students will be sharply curtailed; and if the Court blesses this exercise of authority, the Department of Education could conceivably use the ongoing national emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic to justify further changes to the federal financial aid landscape.

1 See Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke , 438 U.S. 265 (1978); Grutter v. Bollinger , 539 U.S. 306 (2003); Fisher v. Univ. of Tex. at Austin , 579 U.S. 365 (2016).

2 See, e.g. , Powell v. DePaul Univ. , No. 21 CV 3001, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201296 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 7, 2022) (dismissing BIPA suit against DePaul University because the university fell within BIPA's "financial institution" exemption); Doe v. Northwestern Univ. , 586 F. Supp. 3d 841 (N.D. Ill. 2022) (same).

3 Larry Hardesty, Study Finds Gender and Skin-Type Bias in Commercial Artificial-Intelligence Systems , MIT News (February 11, 2018), http://news.mit.edu/2018/study-finds-gender-skin-typebias-artificial-intelligence-systems-0212 ; Meredith Whittaker et al., AI Now Report 2018 , AI Now Institute, at 16 (December 2018), https://ainowinstitute.org/AI_Now_2018_Report.pdf (citing Joy Buolamwini & Timnit Gebru, Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification , Proceedings of machine learning research (2018), http://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html) .

4 Liane Colonna, Legal Implications of Using AI as an Exam Invigilator , Stockholm Faculty of Law Research Paper Series no. 91 (May 5, 2021), https://ssrn.com/abstract=3839287 .

5 See Sharon Goldman, Why generative AI legal battles are brewing , The AI Beat, VentureBeat (Oct. 21, 2022), https://venturebeat.com/ai/why-generative-ai-legal-battles-are-brewing-the-ai-beat/ .

6 See Texas v. United States , No. 18-cv-00068 (S.D. Tex., filed May 1, 2018).

7 See Texas v. United States , 86 F. Supp. 3d 591, 604 (S.D. Tex. 2015).

8 Texas v. United States , 549 F. Supp. 3d 572, 624 (S.D. Tex. 2021); Texas v. United States , 50 F.4th 498, 528 (5th Cir. 2022).

9 See Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, 87 Fed. Reg. 53152-01 (Aug. 30, 2022) (to be codified at 8 C.F.R. pts 106, 236, and 274a).

10 NCAA v. Alston , 141 S. Ct. 2141 (2021).

11 In re College Athlete NIL Litigation , 4:20-cv-03919-CW (N.D. Cal., filed June 15, 2020).

12 Kevin Harrish, Big Ten potential conference expansion legal problems revealed , The Comeback (Aug. 4, 2022), https://thecomeback.com/ncaa/big-ten-conference-realignment-legal-problems-pac-12.html .

13 James Parks, College football realignment: CA Regents to discuss litigation amid UCLA move , Fan Nation Sports Illustrated (July 12, 2022), https://www.si.com/fannation/college/cfb-hq/ncaa-football/college-football-realignment-ucla-big-ten-regents-legal-issues .

14 Corzo, et al. v. Brown University, et al. , 1:22-cv-00125 (N.D. Ill., filed Jan. 9, 2022).

15 No. 22-cv-1223 (3d Cir., filed Feb. 8, 2022).

16 Oral argument in the case was recently postponed from January 18, 2023, to February 15, 2023. Id. at Dkt. 68 (Jan. 17, 2023).

17 Babak G. Yousefzadeh & Skyler Hicks, What the Third Circuit's Looming Decision Regarding Whether College Athletes Can Constitute "Employees" Will Mean for Universities and Employers of Unpaid Student Interns , The National Law Review (Jan. 18, 2023), https://www.natlawreview.com/article/what-third-circuit-s-looming-decision-regarding-whether-college-athletes-can .

18 Alex Lawson, Sports & Betting Legislation And Regulation to Watch In 2023 , Law360 (Jan. 2, 2023), https://www.law360.com/articles/1560997/sports-betting-legislation-and-regulation-to-watch-in-2023 .

20 Gee v. NCAA , No. 20-STCV-43627 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.); see also Brian Melley, Jury: NCAA not to blame in ex-USC football player's death , The Seattle Times (Nov. 23, 2022), https://www.seattletimes.com/business/jury-ncaa-not-to-blame-in-ex-usc-football-players-death/ .

21 Finnerty v. NCAA , No. 49D14-1808-CT-033896 (Ind. Super. Ct., Marion Cty.); see also, e.g. , Campion v. NCAA , No. 27-CV-21-10480 (Minn. Dist. Ct., Hennepin Cty.); Greiber v. NCAA , No. 600400/2017 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty.).

22 Erica Green, Strife in the Schools: Education Dept. Logs Record Number of Discrimination Complaints , The New York Times (Jan. 1, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/01/us/politics/education-discrimination.html .

24 Safeguarding Students' Civil Rights, Promoting Educational Excellence , U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights Report to the President and Secretary of Education (2021), https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/ocr/report-to-president-and-secretary-of-education-2021.pdf .

25 Id. at 41, n.4.

26 Erica Green, DeVos Education Dept. Begins Dismissing Civil Rights Cases in Name of Efficiency , The New York Times (Apr. 20, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/us/politics/devos-education-department-civil-rights.html .

27 Kim Elsesser, Stanford University Under Investigation For Sex Bias – Against Men , Forbes (Nov. 30, 2022), https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2022/11/30/stanford-university-under-investigation-for-sex-bias-against-men/?sh=68fbf1c93c17 .

28 "The Mission," America First Legal, https://aflegal.org/about/ .

29 Kate McGee, In lawsuit, UT-Austin professor accuses Texas A&M faculty program of discriminating against white and Asian men , The Texas Tribune (Sept. 12, 2022), https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/12/texas-a-m-lawsuit-diversity-discrimination/ .

31 Charlotte Huff, Building a better, more diverse faculty , 52 Monitor on Psychology 25 (Nov. 1, 2021), https://www.apa.org/monitor/2021/11/news-diverse-faculty .

32 Nat'l Ass'n of Gov't Emps. v. City Pub. Serv. Bd. of San Antonio, Tex. , 40 F.3d 698, 706 n.9 (5th Cir. 1994).

33 Press Release, Foxx Named Chair of Education and the Workforce Committee , Committee on Education & The Workforce (Jan. 9, 2023), https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=408753 .

34 Letter from Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman, Committee on Education and the Workforce, to Miguel Cardona, Secretary, Department of Education (Jan. 12, 2023), https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jan._2023_follow_up_letter_to_ed.pdf .

35 Press Release, Foxx on Fox Talks Student Loans, Parents' Rights, and the Dignity of Work , Committee on Education & The Workforce (Jan. 18, 2023), https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=408770 .

36 Letter from James Comer, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Accountability to Mary Elizabeth Magill, President, University of Pennsylvania (Jan. 18, 2023), https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2023-01-18-Letter-UPenn-Penn-Biden-Center.pdf .

38 Patricia Zengerle, New U.S. House creates committee focused on competing with China , Reuters (Jan. 11, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/us/new-us-house-creates-committee-focused-competing-with-china-2023-01-10/ .

39 Nathan M. Greenfield, Republicans tighten their grip on higher education agenda, University World News (Jan. 8, 2023), https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20230105121324377 .

40 House GOP Spending Freeze Would 'Devastate' Medical Research , Bloomberg Law (Jan. 11, 2023), https://news.bloomberglaw.com/pharma-and-life-sciences/house-gop-spending-freeze-would-devastate-medical-research .

41 Federal Student Aid Programs, 87 Fed. Reg. 61512 (Oct. 12, 2022), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-10-12/pdf/2022-22205.pdf .

42 Adam Liptak, Supreme Court to Hear Student Debt Forgiveness Case , The New York Times (Dec. 1, 2022), https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/01/us/politics/supreme-court-student-loan-forgiveness.html .

44 20 U.S.C. § 1098bb (2003).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Consumer Protection

United states.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

•  Sign into My Research
•  Create My Research Account
• Company Website
• Our Products
• About Dissertations
• Español (España)
• Support Center

Select language

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Português (Brasil)
• Português (Portugal)

Welcome to My Research!

You may have access to the free features available through My Research. You can save searches, save documents, create alerts and more. Please log in through your library or institution to check if you have access.

Translate this article into 20 different languages!

If you log in through your library or institution you might have access to this article in multiple languages.

Get access to 20+ different citations styles

Styles include MLA, APA, Chicago and many more. This feature may be available for free if you log in through your library or institution.

Looking for a PDF of this document?

You may have access to it for free by logging in through your library or institution.

Want to save this document?

You may have access to different export options including Google Drive and Microsoft OneDrive and citation management tools like RefWorks and EasyBib. Try logging in through your library or institution to get access to these tools.

• Document 1 of 1
• More like this
• Scholarly Journal

Urgent Issues And Modern Challenges Of Higher Education

No items selected.

Please select one or more items.

[[missing key: loading-pdf-error]] [[missing key: loading-pdf-link]]

Modern society, which is experiencing dynamic changes due to the new global challenges, is definitely looking for solutions in science and education. The life of many generations has proved that no matter what problems humanity faces, their solution requires intellectual effort, a scientific approach and a quality education system as one of the most effective means of disseminating ideas, knowledge and values.

At the same time, such a situation always leads to the thorough attention to the phenomenon of education, in particular higher education. Great expectations and hopes cause significant demands and fundamental tasks that the society puts forward to the academic community. Satisfaction of these requirements and the solution of such tasks is probably not possible without self-analysis and self-reflection, without identifying those problems that inhibit the development of education itself, decrease its functionality, and discredit its status as the spiritual basis of social life. Therefore, we will further try to formulate our vision of current issues and current challenges in higher education.

You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer

Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer

Suggested sources

• About ProQuest
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy

More From Forbes

Higher education faces its biggest test yet—but is getting these answers right.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Correcting a formula on the blackboard

Higher education is getting at least three things right as colleges and universities pivot to confront some of the greatest challenges in the nation’s history.

First, despite its many challenges and need for self-reform, the system works in important ways. As The Hechinger Report has noted , people with education beyond high school not only earn much more on average, but live longer, divorce less frequently and are less prone to depression. The system is far from perfect, but that’s a good place to start.

For all higher ed’s problems—including rising costs, racial inequities, and uneven career preparation—the growth in college attainment has been one of the best social success strategies of the last 15 years. Since 2008, we’ve seen the percentage of people with college degrees or valuable credentials increase from 38 percent to 54 percent last year.

Society’s demand for talent continues to grow, to the point that two-thirds of good-paying jobs now require a post-high school credential. But the nation cannot meet that demand for talent without promoting greater fairness in the system by closing equity gaps in attainment. In building support for that fairness, it’s important to highlight how racial equity not only helps individuals but creates shared outcomes benefitting everyone.

The race for improvement increasingly focuses on the complicated needs of today’s students—needs that can be understood by imagining a three-legged stool. The legs are financial issues, academic challenges, and social / emotional needs. The problem with many of the strategies to help students is that they tend to work on these problems individually, without acknowledging how they interact.

A student may be worried about paying for college, dealing with job and childcare responsibilities, and even mental health issues. Those worries interact in real time, and schools need a comprehensive approach that recognizes all three areas.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of September 2023

Best 5% interest savings accounts of september 2023.

We're seeing real signs of progress in the way some schools address this:

- At the University of Kentucky, the Office of Student Success helped increase its retention rate to 86 percent by taking a more holistic approach.

- California Community Colleges are using $30 million in new state funding to establish basic needs centers.

- Florida International University, with more than 75 percent students of color, has been recognized for academic, financial, and social supports. Washington Monthly ranked FIU 19th among 442 national universities for enrolling Pell Grant students and graduating them into good-paying jobs.

This is a case where technology is also helping—especially in coaching and advising. Coaching often works well but is labor-intensive and expensive. As artificial intelligence systems improve and spread beyond customer service applications, we will see them increasingly working with human counselors to better support our students.

In addition to this more holistic approach to supporting students, institutions are working hard in two other areas:

Building New Partnerships

Educators and their advocates are working much harder to explain what they do and how students and society both benefit. At many campuses, that includes closer relationships with local companies that offer internships and other opportunities for immersive learning. It means emphasizing the job-finding benefits of associate and bachelor’s degrees.

And it means highlighting the enormous opportunities provided by certificates and other high-quality, short-term credentials. In this case, high quality means value not only in the job market, but also as a step to additional learning. These “stackable” credentials build toward deeper learning, higher-level credentials, and greater economic and social benefits. So rather than seeing learning and earning as separate phases of life, a better system provides lifelong opportunities for earning, learning, and serving.

There are headwinds, to be sure. A 2020 survey of business leaders by Boston Consulting Group and Google found that only 36 percent believe higher ed gives graduates adequate training for jobs. More than 80 percent favored closer alignment of curricula with job openings and skills gaps.

But partnerships are growing across the country. Amazon Web Services, for example, has established programs at more than 200 colleges in the United States to train students in cloud computing technology.

In New York, LaGuardia Community College in Queens is working with regional healthcare groups in a nine-credit program that trains students in medical billing. The school says its completion rate is nearly 90 percent, with 80 percent of graduates hired into medical billing and similar jobs.

Telling the Story

It’s common today to hear talk about the great divide in America. A better way to think of that is to consider how politics bifurcates the public dialogue. There’s no sure answer to this, but progress will come from being clearer about higher ed’s contributions—economic, social, and cultural—for individuals and society.

That means plain talk, avoiding the jargon that loses people in these conversations: Higher ed is about preparing people for work and for life. But there is a greater need now to be clear about what that means—how work has changed in modern society, and what is expected of graduates in terms of contributing to their community through good citizenship.

The system faces an unprecedented stress test but has history on its side. For nearly a century, the rest of the world has looked to the United States as the model of higher education. We’ve been seen as the engine of progress, the emblem of opportunity drawing people here from across the globe.

That worldwide regard for our higher education system stems from the benefits it produces in earning power and life success. But it’s also rooted in college graduates’ vital role in powering and protecting our democracy, strengthening our economy, and bolstering national security.

Higher ed needs to change. But it is getting some important things right. Education’s supporters should remember that—and speak up—when facing the challenges ahead.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Four of the biggest problems facing education—and four trends that could make a difference

Eduardo velez bustillo, harry a. patrinos.

In 2022, we published, Lessons for the education sector from the COVID-19 pandemic , which was a follow up to,  Four Education Trends that Countries Everywhere Should Know About , which summarized views of education experts around the world on how to handle the most pressing issues facing the education sector then. We focused on neuroscience, the role of the private sector, education technology, inequality, and pedagogy.

Unfortunately, we think the four biggest problems facing education today in developing countries are the same ones we have identified in the last decades .

1. The learning crisis was made worse by COVID-19 school closures

Low quality instruction is a major constraint and prior to COVID-19, the learning poverty rate in low- and middle-income countries was 57% (6 out of 10 children could not read and understand basic texts by age 10). More dramatic is the case of Sub-Saharan Africa with a rate even higher at 86%. Several analyses show that the impact of the pandemic on student learning was significant, leaving students in low- and middle-income countries way behind in mathematics, reading and other subjects.  Some argue that learning poverty may be close to 70% after the pandemic , with a substantial long-term negative effect in future earnings. This generation could lose around $21 trillion in future salaries, with the vulnerable students affected the most.

2. Countries are not paying enough attention to early childhood care and education (ECCE)

At the pre-school level about two-thirds of countries do not have a proper legal framework to provide free and compulsory pre-primary education. According to UNESCO, only a minority of countries, mostly high-income, were making timely progress towards SDG4 benchmarks on early childhood indicators prior to the onset of COVID-19. And remember that ECCE is not only preparation for primary school. It can be the foundation for emotional wellbeing and learning throughout life; one of the best investments a country can make.

3. There is an inadequate supply of high-quality teachers

Low quality teaching is a huge problem and getting worse in many low- and middle-income countries.  In Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, the percentage of trained teachers fell from 84% in 2000 to 69% in 2019 . In addition, in many countries teachers are formally trained and as such qualified, but do not have the minimum pedagogical training. Globally, teachers for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects are the biggest shortfalls.

4. Decision-makers are not implementing evidence-based or pro-equity policies that guarantee solid foundations

It is difficult to understand the continued focus on non-evidence-based policies when there is so much that we know now about what works. Two factors contribute to this problem. One is the short tenure that top officials have when leading education systems. Examples of countries where ministers last less than one year on average are plentiful. The second and more worrisome deals with the fact that there is little attention given to empirical evidence when designing education policies.

To help improve on these four fronts, we see four supporting trends:

1. Neuroscience should be integrated into education policies

Policies considering neuroscience can help ensure that students get proper attention early to support brain development in the first 2-3 years of life. It can also help ensure that children learn to read at the proper age so that they will be able to acquire foundational skills to learn during the primary education cycle and from there on. Inputs like micronutrients, early child stimulation for gross and fine motor skills, speech and language and playing with other children before the age of three are cost-effective ways to get proper development. Early grade reading, using the pedagogical suggestion by the Early Grade Reading Assessment model, has improved learning outcomes in many low- and middle-income countries. We now have the tools to incorporate these advances into the teaching and learning system with AI , ChatGPT , MOOCs and online tutoring.

2. Reversing learning losses at home and at school

There is a real need to address the remaining and lingering losses due to school closures because of COVID-19.  Most students living in households with incomes under the poverty line in the developing world, roughly the bottom 80% in low-income countries and the bottom 50% in middle-income countries, do not have the minimum conditions to learn at home . These students do not have access to the internet, and, often, their parents or guardians do not have the necessary schooling level or the time to help them in their learning process. Connectivity for poor households is a priority. But learning continuity also requires the presence of an adult as a facilitator—a parent, guardian, instructor, or community worker assisting the student during the learning process while schools are closed or e-learning is used.

To recover from the negative impact of the pandemic, the school system will need to develop at the student level: (i) active and reflective learning; (ii) analytical and applied skills; (iii) strong self-esteem; (iv) attitudes supportive of cooperation and solidarity; and (v) a good knowledge of the curriculum areas. At the teacher (instructor, facilitator, parent) level, the system should aim to develop a new disposition toward the role of teacher as a guide and facilitator. And finally, the system also needs to increase parental involvement in the education of their children and be active part in the solution of the children’s problems. The Escuela Nueva Learning Circles or the Pratham Teaching at the Right Level (TaRL) are models that can be used.

3. Use of evidence to improve teaching and learning

We now know more about what works at scale to address the learning crisis. To help countries improve teaching and learning and make teaching an attractive profession, based on available empirical world-wide evidence , we need to improve its status, compensation policies and career progression structures; ensure pre-service education includes a strong practicum component so teachers are well equipped to transition and perform effectively in the classroom; and provide high-quality in-service professional development to ensure they keep teaching in an effective way. We also have the tools to address learning issues cost-effectively. The returns to schooling are high and increasing post-pandemic. But we also have the cost-benefit tools to make good decisions, and these suggest that structured pedagogy, teaching according to learning levels (with and without technology use) are proven effective and cost-effective .

4. The role of the private sector

When properly regulated the private sector can be an effective education provider, and it can help address the specific needs of countries. Most of the pedagogical models that have received international recognition come from the private sector. For example, the recipients of the Yidan Prize on education development are from the non-state sector experiences (Escuela Nueva, BRAC, edX, Pratham, CAMFED and New Education Initiative). In the context of the Artificial Intelligence movement, most of the tools that will revolutionize teaching and learning come from the private sector (i.e., big data, machine learning, electronic pedagogies like OER-Open Educational Resources, MOOCs, etc.). Around the world education technology start-ups are developing AI tools that may have a good potential to help improve quality of education .

After decades asking the same questions on how to improve the education systems of countries, we, finally, are finding answers that are very promising.  Governments need to be aware of this fact.

To receive weekly articles,  sign-up here  

Get updates from Education for Global Development

Thank you for choosing to be part of the Education for Global Development community!

Your subscription is now active. The latest blog posts and blog-related announcements will be delivered directly to your email inbox. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Consultant, Education Sector, World Bank

Senior Adviser, Education

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

Problems of Education in the 21st Century

Issn 1822-7864 (print) issn 2538-7111 (online), urgent issues and modern challenges of higher education.

• Google Scholar

Where Joe Biden and Donald Trump Stand on Abortion

By Maggie Astor

Maybe it seems as though we have been here before. But this rerun of the 2020 election is happening in a vastly changed world, with urgent stakes for matters both domestic and international. We have learned more about President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump over the last four years, too.

Here is what both men have done and want to do on some of the most pressing issues, starting with abortion , democracy , the economy , immigration , Israel and Gaza and Social Security and Medicare .

Roe v. Wade

“Give me a Democratic House of Representatives and a bigger Democratic Senate, and we will pass a new law to restore and protect Roe v. Wade ,” Mr. Biden said in January .

The congressional caveat is essential. He needs not just bare Democratic majorities but also 50 senators willing to get rid of the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to pass most legislation.

In the absence of such majorities, Mr. Biden’s cabinet has taken some administrative actions to try to limit the effects of state abortion bans.

His Department of Health and Human Services told hospitals in 2022 that, under its interpretation, a law already on the books pertaining to emergency rooms, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act , obligates doctors to perform an abortion if they believe it is needed to stabilize a patient. That guidance is subject to legal challenges on which the Supreme Court has declined to rule yet .

In April, the same department announced a rule to shield many abortion patients’ medical records from investigators and prosecutors.

“It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not,” he said. “It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions.”

Mr. Trump appointed Justices Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Without them, Roe v. Wade would still be law.

He has boasted about that fact on multiple occasions, saying he accomplished what no Republican president before him could and, as recently as April, calling himself “proudly the person responsible” for the overturning of Roe.

“After 50 years of failure, with nobody coming even close, I was able to kill Roe v. Wade , much to the ‘shock’ of everyone, and for the first time put the pro life movement in a strong negotiating position,” he wrote on social media last year, adding, “Without me there would be no 6 weeks, 10 weeks, 15 weeks, or whatever is finally agreed to.”

Federal Ban

He has long made contradictory statements on the matter, at times suggesting he might support some version of a federal ban. And in the Time magazine interview published in April, he deflected when asked whether he would veto a bill that defined life as beginning at fertilization.

His campaign did not give a yes-or-no answer when asked if he would support enforcing the Comstock Act , an 1873 law that prohibits mailing materials used in abortions, and that some Trump allies want him to use to restrict abortion nationally without a formal ban. “President Trump has long been consistent in supporting the rights of states to make decisions on abortion,” a spokeswoman said.

He has framed his caution around abortion as a political matter because “you have to win elections.”

Personal Views

“I’m a practicing Catholic. I’m not big on abortion,” he said at a fund-raiser last year, while adding, “Roe v. Wade got it right.”

He used to support abortion rights; in 1999, he called himself “very pro-choice.” But when he ran for president in 2016, he recast himself as an anti-abortion stalwart to court conservative Christians, and that is how he governed.

In Vitro Fertilization

The fertility treatment can be threatened by anti-abortion measures that treat embryos as people with legal rights, since it usually involves creating multiple embryos and destroying or indefinitely freezing unused ones. The matter gained urgency after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled in February that frozen embryos were children, upending I.V.F. in the state. Mr. Biden condemned the ruling.

The Alabama Legislature subsequently passed a law that gave I.V.F. clinics immunity but did not address embryos’ legal status.

Medication Abortion

Mr. Biden and his administration have defended mifepristone . His solicitor general successfully urged the Supreme Court to reject a lawsuit that had sought to limit access to mifepristone sharply. The court unanimously upheld access in June based on the plaintiffs’ standing; anti-abortion activists have signaled that they may try again with different plaintiffs.

“I continue to stand by F.D.A.’s evidence-based approval of mifepristone,” Mr. Biden said in a statement last year, adding that the lawsuit threatened the “F.D.A.’s medical judgment and put women’s health at risk.”

He also supported the F.D.A.’s more recent decision that allows retail pharmacies to become certified to dispense mifepristone; previously, only doctors, clinics and some mail-order pharmacies could do so. He has encouraged pharmacies to seek that certification.

In an effort to blunt the effects of state abortion bans, the Department of Health and Human Services advised pharmacists that they might violate civil rights laws if they refused to dispense drugs like mifepristone, misoprostol and methotrexate that can be used for abortions but also other medical purposes. Texas sued over this, and its lawsuit is pending.

The Justice Department also issued a legal opinion that the Postal Service could deliver abortion drugs to states with bans without violating the Comstock Act , an 1873 law that prohibits mailing materials used in abortions. Abortion opponents have expressed interest in enforcing a strict interpretation of that law.

He appointed the district judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, whose ruling last year voided the F.D.A.’s approval of the drug . An appeals court panel that was composed mainly of Trump appointees allowed mifepristone to stay on the market but upheld other parts of Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling that made the drug harder to obtain. In June, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the challenge to mifepristone based on the plaintiffs’ standing; anti-abortion activists have signaled that they may try again with different plaintiffs.

Mr. Trump’s campaign did not respond to requests to comment on the Supreme Court ruling or to say whether he would support rescinding F.D.A. approval for abortion pills.

Money and Abortion

Versions of the global rule blocking certain foreign aid, called the Mexico City policy, have been enacted by every Republican president, and rescinded by every Democratic one, since the 1980s.

Mr. Biden revoked both the global rule and the domestic one that Mr. Trump enacted.

In 2019, Mr. Biden said that he opposed the Hyde Amendment , which bans Medicaid funding for most abortions. That was a change in his longtime stance on the matter, but he has not made a major push for its repeal.

Republican presidents have routinely done that, but Mr. Trump went further: He extended the policy to block the organizations from receiving not only family-planning funding but also broader health aid, including money for clean water, nutrition programs and H.I.V., malaria and tuberculosis prevention.

He also placed similar restrictions on Title X funding for domestic organizations for the first time since the Reagan administration.

Mr. Trump supported an unsuccessful Senate effort to make permanent the Hyde Amendment , which bans Medicaid funding for most abortions.

Transfer of Power

“For a long time, we’ve told ourselves that American democracy is guaranteed, but it’s not — we have to defend it, protect it, stand up for it, each and every one of us,” he said in Philadelphia in 2022, in one of at least four major speeches he has given on democracy. He urged Americans to “unite behind the single purpose of defending our democracy regardless of your ideology.”

Mr. Biden signed reforms to the Electoral Count Act meant to prevent a repeat of Mr. Trump’s attempt to exploit the Jan. 6 proceedings to overturn his loss. The legislation — which addressed formal election certification procedures, not the storming of the Capitol — established that the vice president’s role is ceremonial and increased the number of lawmakers required to object to counting a state’s electoral votes.

“I think we’re going to win,” he said in an April interview with Time . “And if we don’t win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election.”

He refused to accept his defeat in 2020, after which he and his allies attempted an extraordinary scheme to subvert voters’ will : They pressured legislators to declare him the winner of states he had lost; organized slates of fake Electoral College electors; pushed Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to certify the results; and agitated his supporters, who threatened election officials and stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Two of the four criminal indictments against him, one federal and one in Georgia , are related to those actions.

He has continued to promote the same lies since then. In 2022, he suggested the “termination” of the Constitution in order to overturn or rerun the election.

He has also described people charged in connection with the Jan. 6 attack as “patriots” and “hostages,” and suggested that he would immediately pardon them if elected again.

Mr. Trump has been pushing his supporters for a turnout this fall that is “too big to rig,” pre-emptively sowing doubt about the validity of the election, as he did in 2016 and 2020 .

Voting Rights

The first bill he supported, the For the People Act, would have set a floor for voting access in federal elections, meaning states could enact more inclusive procedures but not less. It would have effectively nullified ID requirements by letting voters sign affidavits instead, allowed all voters to register online and on Election Day, automatically registered people who visited agencies like the D.M.V., and restored voting rights to felons who completed their sentences.

It would also have limited gerrymandering by requiring independent commissions for House redistricting; required political action committees to report foreign contacts; more strictly regulated campaign finance, including by eliminating much of the donor anonymity allowed by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling; and provided public funding to candidates who rejected private donations over $1,000.

After Republicans filibustered the For the People Act, Mr. Biden supported a narrower version called the Freedom to Vote Act , as well as the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act , which would have restored sections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that the Supreme Court has struck down or weakened. Republicans also filibustered those .

His words have fueled a decline in public confidence in the well-documented integrity of the electoral system that many Republican state legislators have used to justify new restrictions on voting . Mr. Trump has largely endorsed those restrictions and has often called for a national voter identification requirement, a common Republican proposal.

He has also called for single-day elections — meaning eliminating early voting — conducted exclusively with paper ballots. But more recently, facing evidence that discouraging early and mail voting could hurt Republican turnout , he told supporters on social media that “absentee voting, early voting and Election Day voting are all good options.”

As president, he established a commission to investigate voter fraud after falsely claiming that undocumented immigrants and votes cast in the names of dead people had caused him to lose the popular vote in 2016. The commission found no evidence of widespread fraud, and Mr. Trump disbanded it .

Executive Power

He also rescinded a Trump executive order that had sought to strip civil-service protections from career federal employees, which would have let the president fire them at will. In April, his administration finalized a rule intended to make it harder for Mr. Trump to strip those protections if he is elected again, though Mr. Trump could simply change that rule .

Mr. Biden has endorsed the Justice Department’s assessment that presidents can order “limited” military actions without congressional approval , a change from his position during an earlier presidential run in 2007. He has ordered airstrikes against Iranian-backed militias that way.

In at least one other respect, he has also used an expansive interpretation of executive power: invoking emergency power to try to cancel more than $400 billion in student debt , an effort that the Supreme Court struck down in 2023 .

He also said he would consider firing a U.S. attorney who declined to prosecute someone whom Mr. Trump wanted prosecuted, telling Time magazine , “It would depend on the situation.”

In his first term, Mr. Trump issued an executive order that sought to strip civil-service protections from many career federal employees, which would have let him fire them at will and purge federal agencies of people he disagreed with. He and his allies have been planning a sweeping expansion of presidential power if he is re-elected.

At least twice , he authorized military force without congressional approval , something Mr. Biden has also done, in keeping with an assessment from the Justice Department.

Mr. Trump also used an emergency declaration to spend more money on border wall construction than Congress had appropriated, then twice vetoed bills passed by Congress to end the emergency. Conversely, he wants the ability to refuse to spend money that Congress has appropriated, something lawmakers banned decades ago.

Fox News’s Sean Hannity asked him in December whether he would pledge not to abuse presidential power. Mr. Trump refused , saying: “This guy, he says, ‘You’re not going to be a dictator , are you?’ I said, ‘No, no, no — other than Day 1 .’ We’re closing the border, and we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.”

Economic Policy

The pandemic kicked off rising prices around the world, as supply-chain problems escalated. Government stimulus in the United States — Mr. Trump approved more than $3 trillion in 2020 and Mr. Biden $1.9 trillion in 2021 — helped fuel demand. Other global factors, like the war in Ukraine, also played a role.

Republicans have blamed Mr. Biden’s spending, and economists have criticized the size and timing of his relief plan, which may have spurred consumer spending as global supply-chain problems persisted. But economists have also credited his rescue package with preventing the U.S. economy from sliding into recession.

The Federal Reserve, which operates independently of the White House, responded to inflation by increasing interest rates — a move that makes it more expensive to take out a mortgage or a business loan, creating a chain reaction that cools the economy.

Since 2022, inflation has slowed while the job market and consumer spending have remained robust , pointing to a potential “soft landing” in which policies return inflation to normal without creating a recession.

But the remnants of rapid inflation have been more stubborn than expected , and many Americans have registered their discontent with the prices of food and consumer goods.

He has argued without evidence that the United States would not have had high inflation if he had remained in office, though most nations did. He has indicated that he would not have spent the money Mr. Biden did in 2021 but has said little about how he would have handled other driving factors.

The agenda he has described for his second term does not appear likely to reduce inflation, and it includes policies like sweeping tariffs and deportations that could make it worse . He has also criticized high interest rates , the Federal Reserve’s primary tool to control inflation.

One of the first bills Mr. Biden signed was the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan , a stimulus package that included direct payments to most Americans, unemployment benefits, child care subsidies and funding for local governments.

He later signed a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure deal and a $280 billion bipartisan industrial policy bill called the CHIPS and Science Act. He also championed the Inflation Reduction Act , which included hundreds of billions of dollars in clean-energy tax credits and health insurance subsidies. All of the new spending measures were aimed at driving job creation , which several studies and government employment statistics indicate they did.

Spending increased more significantly during the pandemic, with stimulus and other relief bills totaling over $3 trillion by the time Mr. Trump left office. Those bills sent two rounds of direct payments to Americans, created the Paycheck Protection Program to keep companies afloat, expanded unemployment benefits and provided funding for hospitals, vaccines and local governments.

In a recent budget proposal , Mr. Biden called for increasing the 15 percent minimum to 21 percent . Separately, he called for partly reversing the reduction that Mr. Trump had signed to the regular corporate tax rate, which brought that rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Here are other measures he wants to take:

Establish a minimum tax of 25 percent for people with assets of more than $100 million

Increase taxes on foreign profits and fuel for private jets

Extend Trump-era tax cuts for households making less than $400,000 a year

Widen eligibility for the earned-income tax credit

Create a $10,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers

Restore an expansion of the child tax credit that successfully reduced child poverty before it expired

Through the Inflation Reduction Act, which was also how he set the minimum corporate tax, Mr. Biden gave the I.R.S. more money to crack down on tax evasion.

The package also temporarily reduced tax rates for individuals , including the wealthiest Americans . Mr. Trump wants Congress to extend those cuts, which expire in 2025; he has also promised “additional cuts” but has not given details.

Though Mr. Trump’s tax package substantially cut taxes overall, in one respect that law went in the other direction: It capped a deduction that let people save on their federal taxes based on how much they paid in state and local taxes. That cap mainly affected high earners in high-tax states like California and New York.

Mr. Trump said in June that, if elected again, he would seek to eliminate taxes on tips.

Unemployment steadily declined over his first year. It fell below 4 percent in December 2021 and has stayed almost entirely below that mark for the more than two years since, fluctuating between 3.4 percent and 4 percent . Job growth has exceeded economists’ expectations.

Other indicators, including growth in gross domestic product, have also been strong, and the stock market reached record highs in the spring.

But during most of his term, the unemployment rate was low . It declined to 3.5 percent just before the pandemic, from 4.7 percent when he took office, a continuation of a trend that began under President Barack Obama.

For much of that time, the unemployment rate for Black people also fell, which Mr. Trump likes to emphasize. It dropped to a historical low of 5.3 percent in August and September 2019, from 7.5 percent in January 2017, another continuation of an Obama-era trend. However, it began to increase in the fall of 2019 and had returned to above 6 percent before the pandemic.

For the first three years of Mr. Trump’s presidency, the gross domestic product increased, and the stock market grew for much of that time as well.

Debt and Deficit

The deficit is more complicated: It is lower now than when Mr. Biden arrived, but that is largely a result of pandemic programs’ expiring. Setting aside the pandemic anomalies, the deficit is higher now ($1.7 trillion) than it was 2019 ($980 billion).

Initial projections from the Congressional Budget Office suggested that the Inflation Reduction Act would decrease the deficit over a decade, but use of its tax credits and subsidies appears to be higher than expected, and it could end up increasing the deficit.

The deficit also increased by historically unusual amounts even before the pandemic, rising by $310 billion between 2017 and 2019, when it hit $980 billion. It then skyrocketed by $2.15 trillion in 2020.

He did not roll back Mr. Trump’s tariffs on Chinese products, and in April he announced that he would expand them, tripling some tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum. In May, he went further, increasing tariffs on electric vehicles, solar cells, semiconductors and advanced batteries, and officially endorsing the Trump-era tariffs that he had criticized in 2020.

He scaled back the Trump administration’s tariffs on European steel and aluminum, but he has not eliminated them.

The Inflation Reduction Act created incentives for companies to keep their operations in the United States.

He set tariffs in 2018 on washing machines and solar-energy equipment , and later on steel and aluminum . The trade war with China began later that year when he imposed an escalating series of tariffs . China responded in kind . Other countries imposed their own retaliatory tariffs . And American consumers bore the brunt of the costs .

Mr. Trump signed an initial trade deal with China in 2020, but the agreement preserved most of the tariffs. He has suggested that he would go significantly further in a second term, including by imposing tariffs of 60 percent or more on Chinese products and 10 percent on other imports. At a campaign rally in March, he said he supported a 100 percent tariff on cars made by Chinese companies in Mexico, and then in May he one-upped himself to 200 percent.

His other major trade policy was a renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement , or NAFTA, which critics said had encouraged the outsourcing of jobs and manufacturing to Mexico. The new version , the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, contains more protections for workers and provisions aimed primarily at encouraging auto manufacturing in the United States.

Regulations

The Federal Trade Commission issued a ban on most noncompete clauses . The Labor Department has called for employers to pay overtime starting next year to people earning up to $58,656 annually, up from the current threshold of $35,568.

Mr. Biden also appointed an aggressive antitrust team and signed an executive order that called on federal agencies to help increase economic competition by scrutinizing big tech, agriculture and pharmaceutical corporations. But courts have blocked some of his efforts, including challenges to acquisitions by Microsoft and Meta . Other lawsuits are in progress: His administration is suing Apple and challenging a merger of two supermarket companies.

One of its most significant steps was weakening the Volcker Rule , which had blocked banks from making risky bets with customers’ money if the customers had not requested the bets. The loosened rule lets banks invest in certain funds that make such bets.

Under a leader appointed by Mr. Trump, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rescinded restrictions on payday loans . The Department of Housing and Urban Development also weakened a housing anti-discrimination rule so severely that banks took the unusual step of opposing a deregulatory move.

Immigration

Illegal immigration.

But he has since pursued stricter policies, partly because border crossings have surged to record levels, making immigration a major issue in the election, and partly because of court rulings.

He endorsed a bipartisan proposal that would have closed the border if crossings reached an average of more than 5,000 migrants a day over a week, and would also have hired thousands of new border security agents and asylum officers. The deal died in Congress after Mr. Trump came out against it.

Mr. Biden resumed construction of some sections of the border wall , saying that he didn’t believe it worked but that he had no choice because Congress had appropriated money for it. His administration waived environmental laws to expedite construction.

This year, he resumed deportation flights that carry migrants hundreds of miles from the border.

He has continued to push to preserve the DACA program , which stands for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, though judges have ruled against it, including last September . In February, he deferred deportation of Palestinians who are in the United States illegally, using executive authority to shield people whose homelands are in crisis.

In June, he also announced sweeping new protections for undocumented immigrants who are married to American citizens. Those protections will shield hundreds of thousands of people from deportation and give them a path to citizenship. Separately, he made many DACA recipients eligible for employee-sponsored work visas, which could eventually open the door to permanent residency.

He plans to round up undocumented immigrants and detain them in camps while they await deportation, rely on a form of expulsion that doesn’t involve due process hearings, and deputize local police officers and National Guard troops from Republican-led states to carry out immigration raids .

Mr. Trump said to Time magazine in April that he would aim to deport as many as 15 million to 20 million people if re-elected — numbers that are equivalent to the population of New York State at the high end.

In the same interview, he said he might deploy the military against migrants both along the border and in nonborder states, claiming that a law that forbids the use of the military for domestic law enforcement would not apply because people who are in the U.S. illegally “aren’t civilians.”

He also wants to revoke birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants, which overwhelming legal consensus holds to be guaranteed under the 14th Amendment.

All of this would be an escalation from his first term, during which he separated thousands of migrant children from their parents and held them in crowded, unsanitary facilities; suggested a border wall with spikes and a moat; and urged officials to shoot migrants in the legs. During a CNN event last year, he did not rule out reinstating family separation.

Mr. Trump diverted money from the military budget to build a border wall without congressional approval. While a wall was his signature promise in 2016, his administration built under 500 miles of barriers along the nearly 2,000-mile southern border during his first term.

He has repeatedly dehumanized migrants , including saying on multiple occasions that they are “poisoning the blood” of the country — language that echoes Hitler — and calling some of them “animals” and “not people, in my opinion.”

Throughout his administration, Mr. Biden has kept several of Mr. Trump’s immigration policies in place , though he ended a rule that had forced asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting hearings.

He initially retained Mr. Trump’s Title 42 policy, which enabled rapid expulsion of asylum seekers on public health grounds — though he did allow more than a million into the country while the policy was in place. He later sought to end it but was blocked ; then it ultimately expired in 2023.

After denouncing Mr. Trump’s asylum restrictions as a candidate, Mr. Biden reinstated a version of one requiring most people seeking asylum to apply in another country first and stating that people who enter illegally are presumed to be ineligible for asylum. (A judge then blocked it .) He also proposed an additional rule to speed up asylum screenings and removals in some cases.

A bipartisan border-security deal this year, which Mr. Biden supported but Mr. Trump torpedoed, would have made it harder to claim asylum while also including a right to counsel for certain applicants, including unaccompanied children 13 and under.

In 2018, he suspended asylum rights for people who entered the country illegally, a policy that was blocked by a federal judge.

His administration used the pandemic to lay the legal groundwork for denying asylum seekers entry into the United States, something he had expressed interest in but been unable to do beforehand. The emergency public health measure he invoked, Title 42, allowed the government to quickly expel migrants who crossed the border.

He wants to reinstate Title 42 if elected again, this time based on claims that migrants carry diseases like tuberculosis rather than the coronavirus.

Legal Immigration

The bipartisan border-security deal he endorsed this year — which Congress also did not pass — would have made more limited changes, including adding 250,000 family- and employment-based visas over five years and ensuring green-card eligibility for the children of immigrants on H-1B visas for highly skilled workers. It also would have enacted measures to reduce illegal border crossings.

Through executive action, he has made migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela eligible for a temporary legal entry program for people whose home countries are in turmoil. He has also admitted hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians under a similar program .

In 2019, he began denying permanent residency to immigrants deemed likely to require public assistance, a rule that disproportionately affected people from Latin America, Africa and parts of Asia. He also significantly limited H-1B visas for skilled workers, but while privately courting business leaders in June, he talked up the importance of high-skilled immigration.

If elected again, he has called for revoking the status of people — including Afghan refugees — who have been allowed into the country for humanitarian reasons, as well as revoking the student visas of people whom he called “radical anti-American and antisemitic foreigners.”

In June, he called for automatically giving green cards to foreign students who graduated from a U.S. college. But his campaign quickly walked that back, saying that only the “most skilled graduates” would be included and that their political ideologies would be vetted.

He said at rallies in October that he would put in place “strong ideological screening” for visa applicants, barring anyone who was “communist, Marxist or fascist,” who sympathized with “radical Islamic terrorists and extremists,” who wanted “to abolish the state of Israel” or who did not “like our religion.” (The U.S. has no state religion, and the First Amendment doesn’t allow one.)

His campaign also said he would expand a program from his first term to strip citizenship from naturalized immigrants whom he determined to be “criminals, terrorists and immigration cheats.”

Travel Bans

Israel and gaza, war in gaza.

As the war has dragged on — killing tens of thousands of Gazans and putting the territory on the brink of famine — he has become increasingly critical of the Israeli government, urging it to reduce civilian casualties. But the United States has continued to supply weapons to Israel.

Mr. Biden paused a shipment of 3,500 bombs in the spring , as Israel began its military offensive in Rafah, the southern city to which more than a million Gazans had fled. But he advanced a different arms sale shortly after that.

While he had warned that Israel would cross a “red line” if it invaded Rafah, he later said an Israeli airstrike that killed dozens of civilians in Rafah did not cross that red line .

In March, he endorsed a temporary cease-fire , and his administration allowed a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for a cease-fire to pass by abstaining from voting. (It had vetoed three similar resolutions .) In May, he called for a permanent cease-fire .

He also ordered the U.S. military to build a port to deliver aid to Gaza , a few days after it began airdropping food in March. The port effort has been beset by problems and appears likely to end operations early .

After Israel killed seven aid workers from World Central Kitchen, he told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that future U.S. aid could depend on whether Israel took steps “to address civilian harm, humanitarian suffering and the safety of aid workers.” Israel then said it would allow more food and supplies into Gaza, but aid workers say much more is needed.

In March, he urged Israel to “finish up” the war quickly because it was losing support, but he also expressed his continued support of the country’s invasion and bombardment of Gaza. In an interview with a conservative Israeli news outlet, he said that he “would act very much the same way” and that “you would have to be crazy not to.”

He suggested that Israel had hurt its cause , in terms of international public opinion, by releasing images of the damage in Gaza. “These photos and shots — I mean, moving shots of bombs being dropped into buildings in Gaza, and I said, ‘Oh, that’s a terrible portrait,’” he said. Of releasing such footage, he added, “Go and do what you have to do, but you don’t do that.”

He reiterated that view to Time magazine in April, saying , “I think that Israel has done one thing very badly: public relations.”

Two-State Solution

However, in April, the United States vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution that would have recommended recognizing a Palestinian state as a full U.N. member. Mr. Biden’s U.N. ambassador said the veto was because Hamas controlled “a significant portion of what is supposed to be” the Palestinians’ state.

The Biden administration said in February that new Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem were “inconsistent with international law,” reversing a Trump-era policy . But at the same time, it defended Israel’s existing occupation of those territories before the International Court of Justice .

Mr. Biden also used an executive order to impose sanctions on four Israeli settlers accused of attacking civilians in the West Bank. The order — which went further than a previous visa ban from the State Department — said that “extremist settler violence” threatened “the foreign policy objectives of the United States, including the viability of a two-state solution.”

The plan, which was never adopted, strongly favored Israeli priorities . It was developed without substantive Palestinian input and would not have created a fully autonomous Palestinian state. It called for making Jerusalem the unified capital of Israel, relegating the Palestinian capital to the outskirts of the city and letting Israel keep its West Bank settlements and control of the Jordan Valley.

More recently, Mr. Trump told Time magazine : “There was a time when I thought two-state could work. Now I think two-state is going to be very, very tough.”

Mr. Trump moved the United States embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv , a decision that threw a wrench into the possibility of peace talks and caused some Palestinian leaders to describe a two-state solution as dead.

He also ended decades of U.S. opposition to Israeli settlements, which significantly expanded during his administration, and he cut aid for Palestinians .

Israel and Other Countries

He urged Israel to view its defense as a victory and not retaliate further; it did retaliate, but opted for a limited strike that avoided further escalation.

But earlier in his term, he had recognized Israeli authority over the Golan Heights , a disputed area between Israel and Syria. That change in longstanding U.S. policy set the country apart from Israel’s Arab neighbors and the United Nations, and was seen as a political gift to Mr. Netanyahu.

He also ended the Iran nuclear deal reached by President Barack Obama and foreign leaders, under which Iran agreed to limit its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. His withdrawal and reinstatement of sanctions pleased Israel, which opposed the deal.

This April, after Iran launched a retaliatory strike on Israel, Mr. Trump told Time magazine that he would support Israel in the event of Iranian attacks.

Campus Protests

In April, a White House spokesman condemned protesters at Columbia University after some of the demonstrations took a dark turn . “Calls for violence and physical intimidation targeting Jewish students and the Jewish community are blatantly antisemitic,” the spokesman, Andrew Bates, said. Mr. Biden later said he rejected both antisemitism and “those who don’t understand what’s going on with the Palestinians.”

After police crackdowns on several campuses, he said : “Dissent is essential to democracy, but dissent must never lead to disorder.”

He said he did not support calling in the National Guard , as some Republicans had urged.

“To every college president, I say remove the encampments immediately,” he said in early May. “Vanquish the radicals, and take back our campuses for all of the normal students.”

He has said that the 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va. — where a woman was killed by a neo-Nazi and many others were injured — was “a little peanut” compared with the campus protests . And he mused about whether punishment for the Columbia protesters would be “anything comparable” to how those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, were punished.

Antisemitism

His administration released the United States’ first strategy for combating antisemitism last year, after several years in which reports of antisemitic incidents increased — a trend that began when Mr. Trump was in office and that has continued under Mr. Biden . The plan’s recommendations include making it easier to report hate crimes, holding anti-bias workshops geared toward workplaces and hiring, and strengthening Holocaust education.

The Biden administration also opened investigations into possible discrimination against both Jewish and Muslim college students.

He issued an executive order in 2019 that effectively defined Judaism as a race or nationality, in addition to a religion, in order to apply protections under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

But he has also repeatedly made antisemitic remarks and associated with antisemites . In 2017, he said there were “fine people on both sides” of a white supremacist and neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Va.

And he has repeatedly described Jews who voted for Democrats as “disloyal” or self-hating, language that critics say invokes an antisemitic trope about Jews having a “dual loyalty,” with a greater devotion to Israel than to their own countries.

In 2022, he lamented that “our wonderful evangelicals” appreciated his support for Israel more than American Jews did. And in 2023, he shared an image saying that “liberal Jews” had “voted to destroy America & Israel.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Disagreements between the two have come to a head over Israel’s actions in Gaza. In March, Mr. Biden praised a speech in which the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, denounced Mr. Netanyahu. And in May, he said there was “every reason for people to draw” the conclusion that Mr. Netanyahu was prolonging the war in order to hold on to office. But he also said he did not believe that Mr. Netanyahu was “playing politics” with the war.

Mr. Biden has been careful with his criticism of Mr. Netanyahu, and reluctant to take actions that would concretely affect Mr. Netanyahu’s government or the war.

But ever since Mr. Trump lost the 2020 election, he has been less friendly toward Mr. Netanyahu — seemingly for a personal reason : Mr. Netanyahu congratulated Mr. Biden on his victory . After the Hamas-led attack on Israel, Mr. Trump criticized Mr. Netanyahu as having been unprepared . He quickly backtracked on those remarks.

Social Security and Medicare

But while he has taken a number of steps to keep Medicare solvent at its current benefit levels, he has not done the same for Social Security. Projections fluctuate based on economic conditions, but estimates from this spring indicate that if policies continue unchanged, Social Security and its associated disability insurance program will run out of money to cover full benefits in 2035.

The Inflation Reduction Act, one of Mr. Biden’s signature legislative accomplishments, allowed Medicare for the first time to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companies — a policy that could both lower prices for consumers and save the program money . The law also included a requirement that drug companies make payments to Medicare if they increase their prices faster than inflation, and reduced the amount that beneficiaries have to pay out of pocket for expensive medications.

Mr. Biden has called for putting the money saved by those policies into Medicare’s hospital trust fund to extend the program’s full solvency beyond the current projection of 2036. He has also proposed increasing Medicare taxes for people earning more than $400,000 a year.

During the 2020 campaign, he proposed expanding Medicare benefits by lowering the eligibility age to 60 from 65, but he has not made a major push to do that in office.

His campaign pledge to raise taxes on people earning more than $400,000 to fund Social Security and increase benefits for low-income recipients also has not been realized , though he reiterated it this spring. One possible way to do that would be to raise or lift a cap on how much income is subject to Social Security taxes, which would mean wealthy people would pay more.

During his time in the Senate, Mr. Biden expressed openness to cuts that he now opposes , including raising the retirement age and reducing benefits.

His team suggested that the economy would be stronger under Mr. Trump, and that could strengthen the programs in the long term. But a stronger economy alone is unlikely to make them solvent.

His campaign quickly sought to clarify ambiguous remarks he made in March, when he told CNBC that he might be open to cuts . “There is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting and in terms of also the theft and the bad management of entitlements,” he said in the interview, but his campaign said afterward that he had been talking about cutting “waste,” not benefits.

In 2023, he said Republicans should not “cut a single penny from Medicare or Social Security to help pay for Joe Biden’s reckless spending spree,” though the programs’ funding gap predates the Biden administration.

In 2020, he suggested that he would “at some point” be open to cuts, then backtracked . As president, he proposed cutting the Social Security budget in part by more aggressively combating fraud.

Projections fluctuate based on economic conditions, but estimates from this spring indicate that if policies continue unchanged, Social Security will run out of money to cover full benefits by 2035, and part of Medicare by 2036.

Earlier in his career, Mr. Trump called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme” and said it should be privatized. He dropped that position during his first presidential campaign, as well as his previous support for raising the retirement age to 70. The current retirement age for anyone born in 1960 or later is 67.

• Share full article

Advertisement

The Ongoing Challenges, and Possible Solutions, to Improving Educational Equity

• Share article

Schools across the country were already facing major equity challenges before the pandemic, but the disruptions it caused exacerbated them.

After students came back to school buildings after more than a year of hybrid schooling, districts were dealing with discipline challenges and re-segregating schools. In a national EdWeek Research Center survey from October, 65 percent of the 824 teachers, and school and district leaders surveyed said they were more concerned now than before the pandemic about closing academic opportunity gaps that impact learning for students of different races, socioeconomic levels, disability categories, and English-learner statuses.

But educators trying to prioritize equity have an uphill battle to overcome these challenges, especially in the face of legislation and school policies attempting to fight equity initiatives across the country.

The pandemic and the 2020 murder of George Floyd drove many districts to recognize longstanding racial disparities in academics, discipline, and access to resources and commit to addressing them. But in 2021, a backlash to such equity initiatives accelerated, and has now resulted in 18 states passing laws restricting lessons on race and racism, and many also passing laws restricting the rights and well-being of LGBTQ students.

This slew of Republican-driven legislation presents a new hurdle for districts looking to address racial and other inequities in public schools.

During an Education Week K-12 Essentials forum last week, journalists, educators, and researchers talked about these challenges, and possible solutions to improving equity in education.

Takeru Nagayoshi, who was the Massachusetts teacher of the year in 2020, and one of the speakers at the forum, said he never felt represented as a gay, Asian kid in public school until he read about the Stonewall Riots, the Civil Rights Movement, and the full history of marginalized groups working together to change systems of oppression.

“Those are the learning experiences that inspired me to be a teacher and to commit to a life of making our country better for everyone,” he said.

“Our students really benefit the most when they learn about themselves and the world that they’re in. They’re in a safe space with teachers who provide them with an honest education and accurate history.”

Here are some takeaways from the discussion:

Schools are still heavily segregated

Almost 70 years after the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, most students attend schools where they see a majority of other students of their racial demographics .

Black students, who accounted for 15 percent of public school enrollment in 2019, attended schools where Black students made up an average of 47 percent of enrollment, according to a UCLA report.

They attended schools with a combined Black and Latinx enrollment averaging 67 percent, while Latinx students attended schools with a combined Black and Latinx enrollment averaging 66 percent.

Overall, the proportion of schools where the majority of students are not white increased from 14.8 percent of schools in 2003 to 18.2 percent in 2016.

“Predominantly minority schools [get] fewer resources, and that’s one problem, but there’s another problem too, and it’s a sort of a problem for democracy,” said John Borkowski, education lawyer at Husch Blackwell.

“I think it’s much better for a multi-racial, multi-ethnic democracy, when people have opportunities to interact with one another, to learn together, you know, and you see all of the problems we’ve had in recent years with the rising of white supremacy, and white supremacist groups.”

School discipline issues were exacerbated because of student trauma

In the absence of national data on school discipline, anecdotal evidence and expert interviews suggest that suspensions—both in and out of school—and expulsions, declined when students went remote.

In 2021, the number of incidents increased again when most students were back in school buildings, but were still lower than pre-pandemic levels , according to research by Richard Welsh, an associate professor of education and public policy at Vanderbilt’s Peabody College of Education.

But forum attendees, who were mostly district and school leaders as well as teachers, disagreed, with 66 percent saying that the pandemic made school incidents warranting discipline worse. That’s likely because of heightened student trauma from the pandemic. Eighty-three percent of forum attendees who responded to a spot survey said they had noticed an increase in behavioral issues since resuming in-person school.

Restorative justice in education is gaining popularity

One reason Welsh thought discipline incidents did not yet surpass pre-pandemic levels despite heightened student trauma is the adoption of restorative justice practices, which focus on conflict resolution, understanding the causes of students’ disruptive behavior, and addressing the reason behind it instead of handing out punishments.

Kansas City Public Schools is one example of a district that has had improvement with restorative justice, with about two thirds of the district’s 35 schools seeing a decrease in suspensions and expulsions in 2021 compared with 2019.

Forum attendees echoed the need for or success of restorative justice, with 36 percent of those who answered a poll within the forum saying restorative justice works in their district or school, and 27 percent saying they wished their district would implement some of its tenets.

However, 12 percent of poll respondents also said that restorative justice had not worked for them. Racial disparities in school discipline also still persist, despite restorative justice being implemented, which indicates that those practices might not be ideal for addressing the over-disciplining of Black, Latinx, and other historically marginalized students.

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In