Combined muiltilingual feed

Turkey-based private education provider BAU Global is set to expand its operations in the UK by partnering with UK HE institutions, as it seeks to become a degree granting institution in its own right. 

The BAU Global Education Network has six universities, three language schools and 16 liaison offices worldwide, making it one of the largest providers of education in Europe. 

“I believe the heart of the world is not the United States, it is in the UK and London”

It uses this network to offer nearly 200 undergraduate, graduate and doctoral programs in arts and sciences subjects. 

BAU Global recently partnered with MLA, a Plymouth University affiliated distance e-learning company specialising in hydrographic qualifications and other marine/maritime subjects. 

This new affiliation with BAU will see MLA both increase the number of courses it offers and expand the reach of its offerings globally. 

BAU GlobalÔÇÖs VP Coskun Ince spoke to The PIE about the importance of the UK for its global strategy.┬á

“I believe the heart of the world is not the United States, it is in the UK and London,” he explained.┬á

“The appetite for the rest of the world to come and do business through the UK is great, itÔÇÖs amazing…

“We found three possible partners that are willing to get the benefits of our know how and experience which we have created over fifty years and they want to open up schools and partner with us.”

Ince explained that because of BAU GlobalÔÇÖs partnership program, students can get dual degrees from other institutions in its network.

Through a combination of distance learning and travel, students will be able to experience teaching at different institutions. 

BAU Global is currently waiting to receive degree awarding power. Something that will help it to offer programs in different countries ÔÇô without depending on affiliate universities.┬á

ÔÇ£We wonÔÇÖt be depending on another institution to survive in a country,ÔÇØ Ince explained.┬á

ÔÇ£Currently, MLA is validated by Plymouth University. ItÔÇÖs a good partner, we love these people and they are very happy to partner with us.┬á

ÔÇ£But having your own degree awarding power means something to the rest of the world and it will add great value to BAU Global.ÔÇØ┬á

Professor John Chudley, rector of MLA College, said the partnership will “no doubt strengthen the international and intercultural perspective [students] gain through their studies”.┬á

ÔÇ£This is hugely important when working within the marine industry, which by its very nature is transnational,ÔÇØ Chudley added.

ÔÇ£Partnering with MLA College is a superb opportunity for us to increase the number of courses we offer within the marine sphere,ÔÇØ said Enver Y├╝cel, BAU Global president.┬á

ÔÇ£With headquarters in the UK, we are thrilled to form strong links within a country that has a longstanding tradition of academic excellence, ensuring our students have access to the best possible resources and tuition.┬á

ÔÇ£As part of a prestigious Institute that upholds professional standards across the world, we are confident that this partnership will benefit not only our students but also the global marine workforce.ÔÇØ

The post Turkey-based BAU Global to increase expansion into UK appeared first on The PIE News.

As of January 1, 2020 University of Twente has become the first university in The Netherlands to make English its official working language.

Following the initial decision made by the executive board back in 2015, UT revised the policy to originally make the change in 2018, which then became effective in 2019 as a year of transition.

“We aim to increase our intake of new international students, particularly in the graduate phase”

Outlined in its language policy, UT states that “the choice of English language is not a goal on its own, but a means for the university to realise its ambition: excellence and cooperation in an international environment”.

While speaking in Dutch is still allowed in informal settings, all employees and students are to now speak in English while on campus and during lectures with all official documents and promotional material to also be in English.

An exception has been made for those courses such as Technical Medicine and Applied Physics that are Dutch-taught ┬áand are to be continued to be taught in “the language of instruction… based on the organisationÔÇÖs official language”.

The making of English as the official language comes as part of UTÔÇÖs Vision2020 with a key part of its strategy being to “educate students to become ÔÇÿglobal citizensÔÇÖ and offer them an international learning environment”.

“We invest in programs that specifically prepare students for an international career, providing opportunities to gain international experience within each educational programs and research project,” the university said.

The strategy further states that UT “aim[s] to increase [its] intake of new international students, particularly in the graduate phase”.

The decision has not gone without criticism however, with an organisation for the improvement of Dutch education, Beter Onderwijs Nederland taking UT to court in 2018 on the basis that the teaching of higher education and research in English broke the laws.

The court later rejected the claim and UT won their case against BON.

The university has further said that any employee that may have difficulty with the change of language will be provided with support and training.

The post Twente opts for English as official language appeared first on The PIE News.

New research has revealed that peer-to-peer interactions influence the majority of students (57%) when deciding where to apply to study, compared to 47% citing friends and family as the most influential reference.

Conducted by Intead and Unibuddy, the research draws on surveys from 370,000 conversations amongst 26,000 prospective students from 57 countries, including Africa (comprising 18% of conversations), Europe (36%), and Asia (38%).

“Student to student connection has taken over as the most influential… even more than friends and family”

It found that more than half of prospective students who chatted with Unibuddy student ambassadors across all regions and degree levels chose to apply to that university.

In Africa, three quarters (75%) said they had chosen to apply to that university, followed by 71% in Europe and 54% in Asia. In terms of enrolments, however, just 19% in Africa enrolled compared with 32% in Europe and 30% in Asia.

When asked ‘did chatting with a Unibuddy student ambassador affect your decision about whether to apply to a university?’,┬á69% of respondents in Africa,┬á 62% in Europe and 51% in Asia said it had.

In terms of study level, 43% of undergraduate and 56% of graduate-level students agreed with the statement.

But while the total prospective graduate students said they valued peer-to-peer interactions (47%), they were the one group still valuing family and friends more (63%) as aids to their decision making.

“Student to student connection has taken over as the most influential and helpful factor when deciding where to apply to university. Even more influential than friends and family – this is a huge shift for universities and colleges,”┬áDiego Fanara, CEO of Unibuddy said.

“Students are the heart and soul of institutions so it’s no surprise that prospective students value the authenticity of their experience above all else.”

The post Survey shows value of peer-to-peer interaction appeared first on The PIE News.

It’s significant when something stands out in today’s supersonic news cycle. And time seemed to at least slow when Alan Dershowitz offered up his defense of President Trump during the U.S. Senate impeachment trial last week. Part of that defense, in Dershowitz’s words, is that “if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”

Those comments were immediately criticized -- including by a number of law professors at Harvard University, where Dershowitz is Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law Emeritus -- as meaning that a president can do virtually anything, as long as he or she believes it’s in the public interest.

Dershowitz has since said that he was deliberately misinterpreted by his political opponents. He believes that his rivals are smart enough to know what he really meant.

The scale of that opposition -- including some 200 constitutional law scholars who signed on to a letter Friday repudiating his constitutional analysis -- suggests the debate is more complex, however.

What Dershowitz Said (And Didn't)

“I did not say that any president can do anything he wants to get re-elected as long as he believes his re-election is in the public interest,” Dershowitz said in a telephone interview Friday. “Quite the opposite -- I started my talk in the Senate by saying that I strongly supported the impeachment of Richard Nixon, and that was all about a president trying to get re-elected.”

Instead, Dershowitz said he was, in response to a question about motive from Republican senator Ted Cruz of Texas, making the following point: that if a president “does anything criminal or criminal-like or impeachable to get re-elected, the fact that he had a decent motive is utterly irrelevant.”

By the same logic, Dershowitz said, if a president’s actions are “completely legal,” and done in what he or she believes to be the public interest, then having an additional, personal motive doesn’t make those actions impeachable.

Does Dershowitz believe that Trump’s actions were “completely legal,” then? Dershowitz said he didn’t appear before the Senate to weigh in on the facts, just the theory.

In fairness to Dershowitz, he did begin his answer to Cruz by saying that “the only thing that would make a quid pro quo unlawful is if the ‘quo’ were in some way illegal.”

Even so, Dershowitz’s critics said his explanation left much to be desired.

Unconvinced Critics

“It seems that in these comments and clarifications, Alan is returning to the main points of his Senate presentation,” Charles Fried, Beneficial Professor of Law at Harvard, told Inside Higher Ed. “His clarification goes back to his principal point that a proper impeachment charge requires the violation of some criminal law -- indeed a criminal statute -- and perhaps a federal criminal statute.” Numerous scholars and commentators have pointed out that this is “incorrect,” and that contrary precedents and arguments exist, Fried added.

Even if the critics are wrong, his defense is a “perfect example of an argument which proves too much," Fried said. That is, if Dershowitz were correct, the implications of his arguments would still be “absurd” and incriminating.

Frank O. Bowman III, Floyd R. Gibson Missouri Endowed Professor of Law at the University of Missouri, who helped organize the new letter condemning Dershowitz’s analysis, was less charitable.

“The fact is that Dersh is an attention-seeker,” he said in an email. “Intellectually nimble, and a good performer. But he’s never been a scholar, ever. He’s a defense lawyer with a sinecure at Harvard.”

Part of what’s troubling to scholars, beyond the motive comment, is the rest of Dershowitz’s answer to Cruz. There’s also what Fried referenced: what Dershowitz said earlier in the week on the bounds of impeachable offenses.

‘The National Interest’ and ‘Mixed Motives’

To Cruz, Dershowitz said, “Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest.” President Abraham Lincoln told General William Tecumseh Sherman “to let the troops go to Indiana so that they can vote for the Republican Party,” and “let's assume the president was running at that point and it was in his electoral interest to have these soldiers put at risk the lives of many, many other soldiers who would be left without their company.”

Would that be an unlawful quid pro quo, Dershowitz continued? “No, because the president, A. Believed it was in the national interest,” and “B. He believed that his own election was essential to victory in the Civil War.”

That’s why “it's so dangerous to try to psychoanalyze a president, to try to get into the intricacies of the human mind,” Dershowitz concluded. “Everybody has mixed motives, and for there to be a constitutional impeachment based on mixed motives would permit almost any president to be impeached.”

Earlier in the trial, Dershowitz also said that only clearly defined crimes are impeachable offenses -- not obstruction of Congress or abuse of power, with which Trump is charged.

Taking on the Founders -- and 500 Colleagues

“I will ask whether the framers would have accepted such vague and open-ended terms as abuse of power and obstruction of Congress as governing criteria” for impeachment, Dershowitz said. Eventually, and boldly, he argued that Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Paper No. 65's discussion of impeachment with respect to violations of the “public trust” has been misread by generations of scholars. The implication? Even Hamilton would be against what Dershowitz called an “expanded” take on impeachable acts and, therefore, Trump’s trial.

Those statements, among others, contradicted the analysis of 500 legal scholars who signed on to previous, December letter saying that a president’s conduct “need not be criminal to be impeachable,” as the “standard here is constitutional; it does not depend on what Congress has chosen to criminalize.”

Citing Hamilton (and, based on Dershowitz’s analysis, misreading him) those 500 scholars wrote that impeachment is a “remedy for grave abuses of the public trust.” Trump’s conduct with regard to military aid to Ukraine and the “favor” he sought from that country “is precisely the type of threat to our democracy that the Founders” generally feared when they wrote impeachment into the Constitution, the scholars added.

“There is overwhelming evidence that President Trump betrayed his oath of office by seeking to use presidential power to pressure a foreign government to help him distort an American election, for his personal and political benefit,” the letter says, “at the direct expense of national security interests as determined by Congress.”

Unsurprisingly, given that popular opinion, many scholars quickly panned Dershowitz’s speech before the Senate. (He also grabbed op-ed headlines such as, “Dershowitz May Have Argued Himself out of Relevance” (The Washington Post) and “The Dubious Impeachment Proclamations of Alan Dershowitz” (USA Today).

‘A Joke’

Laurence Tribe, Carl M. Loeb University Professor at Harvard and a co-organizer of the Friday letter against Dershowitz’s analysis, for example, wrote on Twitter last week that Dershowitz “just argued that a president who believes only he can fix it -- who thinks his re-election is vital to the nation -- can’t be impeached for abusing his power to corrupt the next election in his favor because by definition he’s doing what he thinks best for the country!!”

Nikolas Bowie, an assistant professor of law at Harvard whom Dershowitz cited during the trial, went on CNN to call his analysis a “joke.” Abuse of power, Bowie said, is in fact a crime, of which people have been recently convicted. And “criminal corruption,” he said, is not comparable to “maladministration” -- a term evoked by Dershowitz but which Bowie said was the 18th-century equivalent of getting a bad performance review.

Fried also publicly commented that Dershowitz had made the “very best argument for getting” former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify before the Senate, to determine Trump's motives and whether they differ from the national interest. Bolton’s testimony probably won’t happen now, after Friday’s close Senate vote against calling impeachment witnesses, but it’s more than likely his appearance wouldn’t have benefited Trump.

And Bowman told the Post that Dershowitz was “essentially alone, and I mean alone,” in his views.

“What Dershowitz did,” he added, “was stand up and be a guy with Harvard attached to his name and spout complete nonsense that’s totally unsupported by any scholarship, anywhere.”

An Official Response

The new Friday letter to the Senate, organized by Tribe and Bowman, says, “[We] write to clarify that impeachment does not require proof of crime, that abuse of power is an impeachable offense, and that a president may not abuse the powers of his office to secure re-election, whatever he may believe about how beneficial his continuance in power is to the country.”

The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” is British Parliamentary term of art introduced into the U.S. Constitution by George Mason, “who explained the necessity for expanding impeachment beyond ‘treason and bribery’ by drawing his colleagues’ attention to the ongoing parliamentary impeachment trial of Warren Hastings,” the letter notes.

More recently, the first and second articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon approved by the House Judiciary Committee alleged both criminal and noncriminal conduct, and the third alleged noncriminal obstruction of Congress, the letter continues. “Indeed, the Nixon House Judiciary Committee issued a report in which it specifically rejected the contention that impeachable conduct must be criminal.”

As for abuse of power, the letter says, two of the three "prior presidential impeachment crises" have involved it. And even if there were no precedent, constitutional logic on it is “plain.”

Finally, the 200-plus scholars wrote, avoiding mentioning Dershowitz by name, “one of President Trump’s attorneys has suggested that so long as a president believes his re-election is in the public interest, ‘if a president did something that he believes will help get him elected, in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in his impeachment.’”

While it’s true that such a choice is not necessarily impeachable, the letter says, if the president “employs his powers in a way that cannot reasonably be explained except as a means of promoting his own reelection, the president’s private conviction that his maintenance of power is for the greater good does not insulate him from impeachment.”

To accept this argument “would be to give the president carte blanche to corrupt American electoral democracy.”

Dershowitz and Academe

Does any of this challenge Dershowitz’s standing in academe? Is his expert analysis so left of field that he can no longer be deemed an expert, especially one affiliated with Harvard?

Bowman said Dershowitz has never really had such standing, and that he's “never done any serious legal scholarship.” Instead, Bowman said he's focused on op-eds and trying his own cases. (Perhaps most famously, Dershowitz defended O. J. Simpson.)

That Senate Republicans hail Dershowitz as an expert “just shows how desperate they are to find somebody, anybody, to tell them what they wanted to hear,” Bowman added.

Harvard had no comment on the matter of Dershowitz’s status, while Fried said that “even Harvard faculty members sometimes make arguments with absurd entailments.”

Dershowitz, of course, disagrees with his detractors. He says that he’s been intellectually alone often in his career, including in being against the death penalty in the 1960s and, more recently, for the limited use of what he's called emergency "torture warrants." He also said he wasn’t afraid to “impugn” his colleagues in asserting that they would not, in some alternative universe, support the same impeachment case against former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

“The burden of proof here is on those who ignore the plain language” of the Constitution on impeachment, which specifically mentions treason, bribery and high crimes and misdemeanors, he said.

“I think professors often allow, consciously or unconsciously, politics to seep into their constitutional analysis,” he added. “I've been proved right more often than not, and I think history will prove me correct here. The next time there’s a Democrat president and a Republican-controlled House, the president will be impeached and all the scholars criticizing me now will be making similar arguments.” (For the record, Dershowitz said during the trial that he voted for Hillary Clinton.)

Dershowitz is currently writing a book on impeachment.

No Misunderstanding

Politically speaking, Seth Abramson, an attorney, assistant professor of digital language arts and professional and technical communications at the University of New Hampshire and a onetime student of Dershowitz, is definitely not a fan of Trump’s: he’s written books called Proof of Conspiracy: How Trump's International Collusion Is Threatening American Democracy and Proof of Collusion: How Trump Betrayed America.

That doesn’t disqualify him from having legal opinions about the impeachment, of course -- and he’s got lots of them. As for Dershowitz, Abramson said his biggest error was introducing the nonlegal concept of "mixed motives" into criminal and constitutional law, where, in his view, it doesn’t belong.

In criminal law, Abramson said in an email, no other motive beyond the criminal matters when that is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And in an impeachment case with implications for national security, the more appropriate preponderance of evidence standard is met if it's “more likely than not that a prohibited intent was present -- whatever other motives it may have been intermixed with.”

Abramson went on to call Dershowitz’s theory of the Ukraine case “radical and dangerous” in that it turns criminal law, constitutional law and “even basic legal precepts like ‘mens rea’ on their heads: he now says a single drop of permissible intent, such as a self-purported desire to fight corruption, purifies an official act entirely.”

Dershowitz’s subsequent explanations about a crime being alleged don’t change much, Abramson added, as House managers did allege during the trial that Trump committed the crimes of bribery and obstruction. Moreover, he said, recalling and challenging another part of Dershowitz’s analysis, bribery doesn’t only occur where there is a transfer of hard currency.

“I don't think Prof. Dershowitz has been misquoted; I think he's been incoherent as a matter of law and his own knowledge of the facts of the impeachment case,” Abramson said.

Academic FreedomFacultyEditorial Tags: LawDonald TrumpFacultyLaw schoolsImage Source: CNN via YouTubeImage Caption: Jeffrey Toobin, Anderson Cooper and Alan DershowitzIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: Harvard UniversityDisplay Promo Box: 

The deal seemed a good one for the Watkins College of Art, a small, private art and design college in Nashville, Tenn. It would be absorbed by Belmont University, also in Nashville, and its faculty could apply for jobs at Belmont. Watkins has fewer than 200 students and has been struggling financially.

But since the deal was announced Tuesday, concerns have been raised about how non-Christian faculty members at Watkins will fare. Belmont is a Christian college and hires only Christian faculty members. At a forum for Watkins students on Wednesday, Artnet News reported that the provost at Belmont, Thomas Burns, said, “We do not hire people who are not Christian … So the ones who are not Christian will not be eligible to work at Belmont. That’s just part of who we are.”

A spokeswoman for Belmont released the following statement: "Belmont and Watkins will be evaluating faculty and staff needs based on the assimilation of Watkins into Belmont. This process will likely take several months, and despite what is being reported, no decisions have been made. Existing Watkins faculty and staff will certainly be given first opportunity to fill any new positions of need. Because we recognize current Watkins employees could not control nor anticipate merging with a faith-based institution, it has been determined that special consideration will be given to current Watkins employees regardless of their position of faith. This exception to Belmont’s hiring policy is only being made due to the nature of merging institutions and out of Belmont’s commitment to care for the Watkins community."

Watkins students have already been talking and rallying against the merger. Opposition to mergers is common -- especially at the college being absorbed -- but the Watkins-Belmont merger has been complicated by the issue of religion.

Quinn Dukes, an artist in New York City who graduated from Watkins in 2007, said she was "really shocked" to learn of the merger plan. Since graduating, Dukes has visited about once a year to meet students. "It's that kind of place," she said.

The idea that Watkins would merge with an institution that would not hire non-Christians is "really disappointing," she said. Dukes said she would have been more open to merging with an institution that hires all kinds of faculty members, and she said that the issue of faculty hiring raised questions in her mind about the treatment of gay artists at the college.

She organized an open letter to the Watkins board questioning the merger. More than 2,800 people have signed the letter.

"The spirit of Watkins is vastly different from that of Belmont University," the letter says. "Students like myself choose Watkins because of its promotion of the individual by immensely thoughtful and skilled faculty. Watkins was a safe and inclusive space for creatives from all backgrounds, preferences, and identities."

The letter raised questions about how current Watkins students would take Belmont's required religion courses, and asked for details about how Belmont planned to treat the faculty members it did not hire.

Steve Sirls, the chair of Belmont's board, posted a response.

"I want to assure you that the board pursued this direction only after careful consideration of the realities facing Watkins now and in the future."

He noted that Belmont has pledged to welcome students and to provide an inclusive environment for "students regardless of age, race, gender or sexual orientation." He did not mention the faiths of faculty members.

Editorial Tags: MergersImage Caption: Belmont UniversityIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: Belmont UniversityDisplay Promo Box: 

Peter Ubel has written a book about the economics of health care — and he thinks there may be a few lessons for higher ed in there as well.

Here's what six months of college visits show about four leading Democrats.

A small industry of experts armed with data is ready to tell you if your college will survive.

The appendix of a new book contains everything needed to calculate a score gauging the market stress faced by individual colleges and universities across the country.

It’s a provocative idea that could provide information of use to discerning students and improvement-minded administrators alike. It’s also an idea that’s getting more attention and growing more controversial of late as the higher education sector continues to feel pressure on several fronts and as a small number of institutions announce closure or merger plans every year.

But the authors of the book, The College Stress Test (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020), intentionally didn’t include a list of institutions and their market stress scores -- even though they calculated scores for well over 2,000 institutions. Instead, they spend the book’s pages examining the higher education market, discussing factors that they used to score institutions’ level of stress, and discussing strategies colleges and universities can use to change their trajectory.

“At its core, this effort to identify institutions at greatest risk due to shifting student markets is a quantitative one,” wrote the authors, University of Pennsylvania higher education professor Robert Zemsky, former Penn director of institutional research Susan Shaman, and Middlebury College professor -- and former provost -- Susan Campbell Baldridge. “We wanted to know which institutions were most at risk of closing and why. But we believe it is also important to understand the emotions that inevitably swirl around questions of institutional viability.”

Their findings suggest college closings won’t be as frequent as some soothsayers have predicted. No more than one out of 10 of the country’s colleges and universities face “substantial market risk,” and closings are likely to affect “relatively few students.” Six in 10 institutions face little to no risk.

Those on campus should pause before taking heart, however. The remaining three in 10 institutions seem likely to struggle, and it will probably be very difficult for them to change their fortunes or market position.

“If anything, that market is becoming more rather than less fixed, making it increasingly likely that it will be the richer and bigger institutions that reap the benefits of a consolidating market,” the authors wrote.

Strategies in tuition pricing, like tuition resets, might buy some institutions time, they suggested. But moving important needles, like freshman-to-sophomore retention, is going to require the faculty to produce changes.

The College Stress Test may seek to have a rational, rather than hysterical, discussion about the pressures squeezing colleges and universities. And it may spare individual institutions from having their stress scores set in print. Still, it is not a blanket reassurance to the higher education sector.

“We caution that failing to pay attention to higher education’s increasingly muddled value proposition will yield both institutions at risk and a market that makes increasingly less sense to a public already skeptical of higher education’s core values,” the authors write.

Zemsky answered questions about the book via email. The following exchange has been edited slightly for clarity.

Q: What did you find to be the greatest predictors that an institution might close?

A: To begin with we were measuring risk -- the risk of running out of students more than money, though there is an obvious link between enrollment and finance. The best predictor of market risk or stress was a combination: declining first-year enrollments and increasing market prices over the last 10 years. In short, if an institution is both increasing its discount rate and still having ever-smaller classes of new students, then it is in real trouble. Or, as we wrote: “The really unlucky colleges have suffered a double whammy over the last decade: higher discount rates that yield less tuition income per student coupled with enrollment declines yielding fewer students. Most losers have also experienced financial shifts large enough that budget reductions alone are unlikely to yield sufficient savings to offset losses in revenue.”

Q: Are any types of institution most at risk, and do they tend to serve a certain type of student?

A: Very small institutions are identified at risk more often than larger institutions.

There are actually very few demographic tags identifying students more likely to attend an institution at market risk. The most obvious was African American students.

Q: Can you briefly explain the Market Stress Test Score and what goes into it?

A: The methodology identifies how and when continuing downward slopes (actual and projected) are important: more discounting, smaller first-year or freshman class, more attrition in the first year of enrollment. All the data come from the individual reports accredited institutions submitted to IPEDS 2008-2016.

Q: This book includes everything you need to calculate risk scores for institutions enrolling the majority of undergraduates in the United States. Why not publish a list of them with their scores?

A: Focusing on institutions runs counter to the central finding of the book: it is the market that is shifting institutional futures both up and down. The challenge is for an institution to understand its place in that market and adjust its strategies accordingly. What an institution’s market stress score signals is its place in the market. What our book provides is the context for understanding how that market works.

Q: How much do students have a right to know the risks they're taking on when they enroll in college?

A: There are no secrets here -- my experience with readily available consumer data is that such information, except for rankings, seldom plays much of a role in college decisions.

Q: What surprised you most about your findings?

A: Two things: Colleges and the universities in the middle of the country face greater risks than colleges in New England; and the best indicator of risk for public four-year institutions is consistently declining state appropriations.

Q: What did we miss in this interview?

A: Not much except that the institutions that can benefit most from our analysis are those in the middle of the market -- they may in fact not fully realize how and why they are at risk in a consolidating market in which the rich are getting richer and the big are getting bigger.

Editorial Tags: Business issuesImage Source: Johns Hopkins University PressIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box: 

The University of Texas at Austin is partnering with the Michael & Susan Dell Foundation to expand the Dell Scholars program to all students at the university who receive Pell Grants.

For participants in the program, the university will cover tuition costs, while the scholarship will provide wraparound supports. Pell recipients with an expected family contribution under $1,000 will get an additional $20,000 over four years for basic needs and other education costs.

The Dell Foundation will commit $100 million over a decade to the program.

"We want to provide the opportunity for more students from low-income families to be successful and graduate," said Gregory Fenves, president of UT Austin.

The university is focusing on Pell recipients because, Fenves said, "despite the work that we have done, there are still gaps in degree attainment and graduation."

UT Austin has about 8,000 students, or 20 percent of the undergraduate population, who receive Pell Grants, he said. The program will be phased in one class at a time.

The university's six-year graduation rate is 86 percent for all students, but only 73 percent for Pell recipients. Nationally, the gap is even worse. A 2018 report from Third Way, a left-leaning D.C. think tank, found that Pell recipients graduate at a rate of 18 percentage points lower than non-Pell recipients.

The Dell Scholars program hopes to address this issue by ensuring low-income students get not only funding for tuition and fees but also a bevy of supports to help them through to graduation.

Michelle Dimino, an education policy adviser at Third Way, said this multifaceted approach can greatly help Pell students graduate.

"Data on graduation rates make it clear that many colleges aren't serving their Pell-eligible students well or equitably, so higher ed's completion crisis has an outsize impact on low-income students," Dimino said in an email. "Efforts like this partnership between UT Austin and the Dell Foundation can provide on-the-ground evidence of what works in closing completion gaps, and state and federal policy makers should be paying attention to its results as they think about funding for higher education.”

Mamie Voight, vice president of policy research at the Institute for Higher Education Policy, said it's "promising" to see this scale of investment in low-income students. It also hits many issues that policy experts advocate for, like targeting the aid toward the most needy, providing extra money for nontuition expenses and giving students services beyond funding to address barriers to graduation, she said.

Much of this is needed as the Pell Grant has "lost its purchasing power," said Voight, so it can't address all of the needs of low-income students.

"We, as a society, should be investing in low-income students and the opportunities they have to pursue higher education," she said.

The university's goal is to raise six-year graduation rates for Pell recipients to 90 percent. Based on UT Austin's past improvements to its graduation rates, Voight said that goal seems reasonable. It's important for institutions to set goals that "are both stretching them and are reachable," she added.

The Dell Foundation operates the Dell Scholars program nationally; students apply to receive the scholarship. It provides students with wraparound supports and $20,000 over four years.

The program at UT Austin will build upon the success of that model, as well as its own efforts. The Texas Advance Commitment covers tuition for students from families with up to $65,000 in adjusted gross income, which Fenves said appears to be contributing to a nearly 20-percentage-point increase in the university's overall graduation rate over the last couple years.

With the Dell Foundation's funding, students with high levels of need will get the additional scholarship money, and all Pell recipients will receive individualized support from the UT for Me -- Powered by Dell Scholars services. These include financial aid coaching and financial literacy training; graduation planning; guided connections to university resources; peer advising; internship and career planning; a laptop computer; and tutoring and textbook support.

The foundation will employ its own staff to work on advising, mentoring and career planning for the program, Fenves said. The university also has been increasing its student support services staffing.

"One of the reasons the Dell Foundation is working with us as a partnership is the commitment we made as a university to increase financial aid for low- and middle-income students," Fenves said.

Janet Mountain, executive director of the Dell Foundation, said the organization has funded student success initiatives for 16 years. This new partnership, however, provides an opportunity for the foundation to work with a large-scale university and to change the standard way it serves Pell recipients, Mountain said.

"It’s not about incremental progress -- it’s about changing the game and changing how students get help," she said.

The Dell Foundation is also committed to using data to address problems in the program early and often. Once the program establishes relationships with students, it can track the outcomes of different services and see what works, according to Mountain.

While graduation rates are "interesting," she said, they're not very actionable.

"Getting underneath that number is what gives us the information to take action," she said.

Fenves said UT Austin already has begun raising money to continue the Dell Scholars program after the 10 years of funding runs out.

"Our goal should be to give every student who attends UT a chance to graduate," he said.

However, Voight had one critique about the program: the foundation's choice of a university partner. UT Austin is relatively well resourced, she said, compared to institutions like community colleges or historically black colleges and universities, which could greatly benefit from such a large investment. Many low-income Texans are enrolled in less resourced institutions, she said, and might not have access to UT Austin and could use the help.

Editorial Tags: Pell GrantsFoundationsTexasImage Source: University of Texas at Austin/MMillerIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: University of Texas at AustinDisplay Promo Box: 

Universities UK will be pushing for the UK government to extend the fee freeze for EU students ÔÇô currently in place for September 2020 enrolments ÔÇô for a further year, while the transition negotiations are in process between the UK and the European Union.

Speaking with The PIE News, Vivienne Stern, director of UUKi, pointed out that the recruitment cycle was already in play for 2021 enrolments, which includes masters programs that begin in January 2021.

“The government will have to make a decision on [fee status],” she observed, “and we will be lobbying for one more year [of EU students treated as UK-domiciled students] until we make a transition beyond that.”

Stern, speaking while at a quarterly meeting of the European University Association in Brussels, also underlined the importance the sector attached to the country remaining in the Erasmus+ mobility scheme.

“I will be working very hard to make [decision makers] understand the value of Erasmus+ beyond money in, money out,” said Stern.

“Those students who have studied abroad do better in employment terms,” she said, one factor among many benefits outlined in a UUK policy briefing.

“I hope the government takes a broad view on the evidential benefits of Erasmus+.”

Spending the eve of Brexit in Brussels, Stern said the reason for the joint statement made with European associations was “not to underline what we want but to stress, do this as soon as you can”.

“Erasmus plays a very important balancing role”

Simon Marginson, professor of Higher Education at the University of Oxford, also believes that the UK’s ongoing participation in Erasmus+ is a priority.

“I think maintaining Erasmus is the big issue for us,” he told The PIE, pointing out the volume of students involved each year.

“Erasmus plays a very important balancing role. The UK’s got a commercial approach to international education outside Europe. You know, it’s quite an aggressive commercial approach and that has some effect on the way in which international education is practised and seen on campus.

“But having big Erasmus communities provides a broader experience for the internationals from other places and also ensures that educational and cultural values are at the forefront as well in the UK’s internationalisation.”

Marginson said that with a PM who was more “cosmopolitan” than his predecessor and the support of universities minister, Chris Skidmore, it was likely that ongoing inclusion in the scheme could happen.

“The government’s committed to it, I think that’s genuine,” he said.

“Their response to the amendment that was defeated was ‘No, we support the principle, we just can’t make these kinds of exceptions in the legislation’.”

While there has also been focus on research (and sister scheme Horizon2020), Marginson posited that in higher education, “it’s all about people, and it’s about students more than anything else. And [Erasmus] is the big scheme in terms of the cultural change that it brings to all of its partners.”

Regarding future projections for EU student recruitment after the transition period and in a new fee era, Stern acknowledged that she expected there would be an adverse impact.

But she was positive on the enduring appeal of the UK’s “high quality” system and expectant that new scholarship vehicles may become available.

“I think some universities’ projections are overly pessimistic,” she said. “Students, willing to pay ┬ú9,000 per year already, in the case that they may have to pay international fees, may still consider the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and [decide to come].”

“Some universities’ projections are overly pessimistic”

There would be clear communications on what sort of financial support might be available for European students, as well as scholarship schemes to consider, she said.

Marginson, meanwhile, suggested that China might be the country that levels out any shortfall in EU student recruitment in the longer-term, and warned of an increasing imbalance in nationality mix this could herald.

“There’s only a certain number of countries where you can actually turn the tap on and let more water flow through, China being the main one,” he advised – pointing out other markets may need further development.

“I think everyone knows that there won’t be any short-term alternatives at scale. So, you know, you could see problems developing around the diversity of intake.”

However, Sarah Cooper, who is stepping down today as chief executive of English UK, says she remains “optimistic for the future of UK ELT” despite “all the uncertainty during this period”.

“Engagement with government and our colleagues in the wider international education industry has never been so positive and encouraging,” she told The PIE.

“Government appreciation of the quality, breadth and innovation in UK ELT, including teacher training, is strong, as is the understanding of the complexity of the overall international student journey.”

The post Erasmus+ is priority for UK, as UUKi confirms fee freeze campaign appeared first on The PIE News.

On the eve of Brexit, education sector bodies in Europe have united in pushing for a seamless transition in terms of mobility agreements for students and staff between the UK and Europe.

“We, the major bodies representing, and partnering with, science and higher education across the UK and Europe, are united in agreeing that we wish to continue to work together following the departure of the UK from the European Union,” the statement reads.

“Swift agreement in this area of clear mutual benefit would be good for all of us”

Signed by 37 domestic and international organisations within Europe, the statement calls on governments to commit to continued UK involvement in the Horizon Europe research program and the exchange program Erasmus+.

“We call on our national governments and the European Commission to act on the commitments of the political declaration and work swiftly to agree a basis for continued collaboration through the UK’s full association to Horizon Europe and Erasmus+,” the statement continues.

“Swift agreement in this area of clear mutual benefit would be good for all of us and should be reached before the end of 2020, allowing for the development of innovative and stronger collaborations over the decades to come.”

Speaking with The PIE News, president of Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) Pieter Duisenberg noted that continued cooperation and collaboration post Brexit is vital

“UK universities and academics are great partners for Dutch universities and Dutch academics,” he said, adding that both Dutch and British students benefit from exchanges.

“ItÔÇÖs a very good two-way relationship. Of course we regret it very much that the UK is having the Brexit now.

“We think that academics and education will suffer if we do not continue the cooperation.”

Up until now uncertainty surrounding Brexit had made it “quite difficult to move ahead”,┬áDuisenberg explained.

“We have to move on right after today and try to come up with good solutions that will be very much like the situation we had when the UK was in the EU, both for academics and for education. Everybody would benefit if we would achieve the same type of cooperation as soon as possible.”

Duisenberg remains┬áoptimistic, and noted that┬áit is “very likely” that┬ácooperation will continue.

“We have plans with our Ministry of Education to move forward now. It is now time to make concrete steps and achieve what can be organised on a bilateral basis and then on a European basis,” he told The PIE.

Another of the 24 National University representative bodies which signed the statement was the┬áGerman RectorsÔÇÖ Conference.

The UK’s exit from the European Union marks a “watershed in the history of European unification”, said its president┬áPeter-Andr├® Alt.

“Together with our British partners, we want to do everything in our power to ensure that academic relations remain as unimpeded as possible by this deep and painful cut,” he said in a statement.

The uncertainty surrounding the future framework for┬áEuropean-British cooperation following Brexit is “proving to be increasingly┬ácounterproductive for academic cooperation,” Alt explained.

“It is now vitally important for German universities, too, that the framework for future cooperation between European and British partners is quickly resolved in the transition phase which is now beginning.”

Ensuring the UK remains fully associated to┬áHorizon Europe and┬áErasmus+ is “the only chance we have to continue the close and well-established relationships with British universities and academic institutions to the benefit of both countries after 1 January 2021,” he said.

 

The post European HE calls for seamless exchange appeared first on The PIE News.

Students from 16 Universitas 21 universities have competed for the RISE Awards for Impact, Innovation, and Potential, with successful teams being offered a bespoke package of international exposure and a global network of expert supporters with a minimum value of US$2000 per team.

RISE ÔÇô Real Impact on Society and Environment ÔÇô is U21ÔÇÖs newest student opportunity, which showcases student-led projects based on an aspect of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

“My congratulations to all who took part and we look forward to supporting them to reach their goals”

A panel of judges from the world of social entrepreneurship and innovation chose the best teams from a selection of inspirational video pitches.

Provost of U21 Bairbre Redmond said this first group of U21 RISE projects were truly inspiring and demonstrate both the ingenuity and the depth of concern that students in U21 universities have in making the world a better place.

“I loved watching these videos and seeing what is happening in social enterprise and innovation around the world,”┬áshe added.

“My congratulations to all who took part and we look forward to supporting them to reach their goals.”

The ‘Most Innovative’ award went to joint winners,┬áRoots Africa┬áand┬áGuided Hands.

Photo: Guided Hands

Roots Africa connects students and academic institutions in America with farming communities in Uganda, while Guided Hands is a medical technology innovation that enables people with reduced fine motor skills to complete everyday tasks.

“Thank you so much for this incredible recognition for Roots Africa,” said┬áCedric Nwafor from the Roots team. “Over the next year, we will be expanding to other academic┬áinstitutions in Africa and the US.”

The ‘Most Potential’ award went to┬áSolar4Schools, which brings solar power to schools in Kenya. It also makes solar power affordable for schools in rural Kenyan communities by developing power systems that not only provide clean off-grid energy but also generate revenue through mobile phone charging stations.

Finally, the ‘Most Impact’ winner was┬áFoodprint┬áÔÇô a social supermarket in Nottingham, the UKÔÇÖs poorest city, selling otherwise-wasted food at low prices to those experiencing food poverty.

“We are excited to scale our environmental and social impact even further in 2020,” said┬áChris Hyland, director of Foodprint.

“We are dramatically increasing the amount of food we save from landfill and are soon to launch Foodprint on Wheels. We are sure RISE’s support will be invaluable in helping make it a success.”

You can see all of the entries here.

The post Students RISE to U21ÔÇÖs newest challenge appeared first on The PIE News.

Over 100 university presidents and leaders from across the G7 countries will come together in the US for the second annual U7+ Summit this June, to explore solutions to the ÔÇ£worldÔÇÖs most pressing issues.ÔÇØ┬á

The U7+ Summit is the annual meeting of the U7 Alliance, the first global alliance of university presidents for the purpose of coordinating and advancing the role of universities as global actors committed to multilateral action to address global problems.

ÔÇ£We are honoured to host this important gathering of universities committed to global leadershipÔÇØ

Presidents and leaders will explore five key issues including climate and energy transition, inequality and polarised societies, technological transformation, community engagement and impact, and universities as key actors in a global world. 

The summit will be hosted by Northwestern University and co-sponsored by Northwestern, Georgetown University, Columbia University and the University of California, Berkeley.

ÔÇ£We are honoured to host this important gathering of universities committed to global leadership,ÔÇØ said Northwestern president Morton Schapiro.┬á

ÔÇ£It is imperative that todayÔÇÖs universities come together to play a leading role in addressing global challenges that can be solved through collaboration across disciplines and geographical boundaries.┬á

ÔÇ£Our role as host of the 2020 U7+ Summit is a natural extension of our global research and education mission and our commitment to focus the worldÔÇÖs brightest minds on the worldÔÇÖs most pressing problems.ÔÇØ

Schapiro said that it was an important moment for Northwestern as they are preparing to unveil an ambitious global strategic plan. 

He said that the universityÔÇÖs goals, which include the development of deeper strategic partnerships and an expanded commitment toward the global social good, are in line with the mission of the U7 Alliance.

ÔÇ£Just as the U7 Alliance has an established agenda that emphasises collaboration and engagement beyond G7 countries, NorthwesternÔÇÖs global strategy is deeply committed to true reciprocity in global problem-solving,ÔÇØ said Annelise Riles, executive director of the Northwestern Buffett Institute for Global Affairs, which will help lead the cross-university team hosting the summit.┬á

ÔÇ£That means building collaborative alliances around mutual benefit and across varying economic circumstances, which is a distinctive perspective Northwestern brings to formation of the 2020 U7+ Summit agenda.ÔÇØ

Last year the inaugural U7+ Summit was held at The Paris Institute of Political Studies (Sciences Po). As in 2019, the 2020 Summit will conclude with a series of concrete commitments made by each university president for their respective institutions.

 

The post Northwestern to host 2020 Global U7+ Summit appeared first on The PIE News.

In the relatively short time since public-private partnerships have become prevalent in higher education, competition for students and new technological trends too have gained momentum. And the result? Tighter, yet fluid relationships.

ÔÇ£The most striking thing has been that originally, companies in this space were seen as ÔÇÿsuppliersÔÇÖ by universities,ÔÇØ ventures Zoe Marlow, who works for award-winning consultancy Sannam S4. ÔÇ£Over time, they have grown and evolved to become much more of a partner.ÔÇØ

ÔÇ£In the case of Sannam S4, after 11 years weÔÇÖre invited to give far-reaching strategic advice in a variety of countries, but particularly India and the US. Before, if you asked somebody about Sannam S4 they would typically say we deliver in-country representation solutions for a particular university; now thatÔÇÖs just one part of what we do.ÔÇØ

“The days of just filling out a pathway centre at a lower-ranked university in a less attractive location are over”

Universities increasingly realise that outsourcing for services where they simply donÔÇÖt have the expertise or the time to invest makes sense, adds Marlow.┬á

CEO Lil Bremermann-Richard, who heads up the broad education business that is Oxford International Education Group, agrees with this: ÔÇ£We can respond faster, and we can establish overseas operations faster,ÔÇØ she says.┬á

In Oxford InternationalÔÇÖs case, Bremermann-Richard believes that less is more when it comes to building and delivering on partnerships.

ÔÇ£Our strategy is about having a tight group of partnerships that are strategically proficient, that do not compete with each other,ÔÇØ she tells The PIE.

ÔÇ£We can [operate faster] because we donÔÇÖt have 15 or 20 university partners, we have four, and we plan to increase to maybe six or eight, but they will have to be the right partners for us.ÔÇØ

And while many providers are now majoring in on direct recruitment, the traditional academic springboard model is still going strong.

ÔÇ£Is the academic pathway market continuing to grow? Absolutely,ÔÇØ Bremermann-Richard says firmly.

ÔÇ£But the competition is no longer coming from the UK or US, and weÔÇÖre seeing more students from countries where the middle class is growing because the economy is growing at a faster pace than in Europe.ÔÇØ

A strategic complement

Given the ubiquity of English medium pathway programs, itÔÇÖs hard to believe that before the mid-1990s they were a relatively new concept.

So with the multiplicity of pathways available to students at a time when traditionally popular study destinations and source markets are in a state of flux, how are established providers adjusting to meet changing demands of HEIs and new disrupters in the international education space?

In the view of Ricard Giner, vice president of Partnership Development at Kaplan International Pathways, relationships have moved on to such an extent as to render the very term ÔÇÿpublic-private partnershipÔÇÖ obsolete.

ÔÇ£ItÔÇÖs a reductive expression because it oversimplifies the level of collaboration taking place,ÔÇØ Giner tells The PIE.┬áÔÇ£There is now much closer alignment between the university and provider on a strategic level.

ÔÇ£So depending on the university, we might tailor the pathway program to the universityÔÇÖs long term goals, such as having a more diverse cohort, and develop strands to the partnership that will help it reach its ambitions.ÔÇØ

Credit: Kaplan International Pathways

For KIP, itÔÇÖs the longevity, more than the number of partnerships that is the real measure of success.

ÔÇ£You cannot underestimate the value of long-term partnerships ÔÇô typically our pathway contracts are 10 years long or more,ÔÇØ Giner says, citing KaplanÔÇÖs partnership with the University of Liverpool.┬á

In the case of INTO ÔÇô whose business model devised by co-founder Andrew Colin and then VC at the University of East Anglia David Eastwood ÔÇô long term partnership deals of up to 30 years and beyond are the norm.

ÔÇ£For us, long-term relationships are a key driver of our partnersÔÇÖ success; it can take time and significant investment to build brand profile in global markets. Long term relationships afford the time to do this intentionally and for students and institutions to reap the benefits of this investment in the years that follow,ÔÇØ SVP of New Partner Development at INTO Tim OÔÇÖ Brien explains.

INTO is another organisation where the pathway label doesnÔÇÖt cover it anymore, it is an ÔÇÿinternationalisation enabling organisationÔÇÖ in the words of OÔÇÖBrien. And while he attests the companyÔÇÖs pathway arm is prospering, ÔÇ£INTO is also experiencing phenomenal growth in direct entry,ÔÇØ he says.

ÔÇ£For us, long-term relationships are a key driver of our partnersÔÇÖ success”

The provider with the most significant number of partnerships of any player, Study Group, has also been experiencing wide-ranging interest from potential partners, chief commercial officer Rajay Naik tells The PIE.

ÔÇ£Study Group has been in the UK for well over a decade now, and in Australia for over two decades, but we have not seen a time where there has been greater interest in the pathway market or in deepening existing partnerships,ÔÇØ he explains.

ÔÇ£We feel very energised about the market, but will be discerning as all partnerships must deliver exceptional student success. We are proud to partner with several of the top 200 universities in the world, as well as the outcomes we deliver for all partners, and this is partly why we are very deliberate about how we grow.ÔÇØ

In the US, where the opportunity for partnerships has really opened up in the last few years, Boston-based private company Shorelight Education has been one to watch since being founded in 2013.

Now, its proven formula in the US of building international communities with its university partners has the potential to reinvent what it means to partner elsewhere, including the UK and Australia, CEO Tom Dretler assures The PIE.

ÔÇ£Year over year, our applications are up across our portfolio,ÔÇØ he explains. ÔÇ£Moreover, as competition increases, our partners and we are getting more creative.ÔÇØ

Increasingly, says Dretler, they are not treating universities like big, monolithic institutions, ÔÇ£but as a dynamic collection of individual colleges and departments that can appeal to many subsets of international students if delivered to them in the right way.ÔÇØ

A different approach

Another player with a stateside focus ÔÇô if a less mainstream approach to university pathways ÔÇô is Kings, which recruits students to its partner universities on the premise that they will have a chance to adapt to higher education life overseas before transferring to another institution.

ÔÇ£We are not going to compete with Shorelight, Navitas or INTO in terms of scale but where we can compete is in terms of student outcomes,ÔÇØ explains director of Marketing Andrew Green, adding that around 84 per cent of KingsÔÇÖ students go on to enrol in top 100 universities.┬á

ÔÇ£We think that with more traditional pathways, the student is expected to make decisions about where they will graduate in four years before theyÔÇÖve even actually left their home country, and that might not necessarily be the perfect decision for them,ÔÇØ he continues.

However, Green says that even with its unique business model, Kings is having to adapt its approach in response to changing trends and increased competition from other players in the market to remain at the top of its game.

ÔÇ£Most of the students that we recruit now are direct entry to the university as opposed to any pre-sessional pathway program. And a new direction weÔÇÖre looking to go down is forming partnerships with larger state university systems.ÔÇØ┬á

Looking forward, Green believes there will be an increasing trend for universities to form partnership agreements with providers who can offer a similar kind of ÔÇ£soft landingÔÇØ for international students and an emphasis on elite outcomes, rather than having embedded facilities.

ÔÇ£I think the days of just filling out a pathway centre at a lower-ranked university in a less attractive location are over, and providers will need to partner with or show demonstrable pathways to more elite institutions,ÔÇØ he adds.

ÔÇ£Most of the students that we recruit now are direct entry to the university”

Facing headwinds

At a time of headwinds for the sector, and when market dynamics are pushing universities to be more commercial in deriving alternative revenue streams, capitalising on online education rather than seeing it as a disrupter will be a game-changer that more private providers will bring to the table.

Shorelight, for one, has developed Shorelight Live and its live instruction model provides students the opportunity to complete some or all of a degree or executive program from a leading US university while completing the majority of coursework in their home country with support and instruction in their native language.

And in the case of Cambridge Education Group’s┬áonline learning division CEG Digital, which partners with prestigious UK universities to deliver online and blended courses globally, is an example of how the public-private partnership model has evolved to become genuinely collaborative.

ÔÇ£WeÔÇÖre equal partners, itÔÇÖs not a vendor-supplier relationship,ÔÇØ CEG Digital managing director Geoff Webster tells The PIE.

ÔÇ£Yes, recruiting full fee-paying international students to come in person is brilliant, but itÔÇÖs a well-trodden path. The difference between our market and ÔÇÿpathwaysÔÇÖ is that ours is not mature; ours is just getting going.ÔÇØ

This is an abridged version of an article that originally appeared in The PIE Review, our quarterly print publication.

The post A power shift in public-private partnerships appeared first on The PIE News.

News that a University of Minnesota student was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in China for tweets he posted while studying at Minnesota renewed concerns about whether Chinese students studying in the U.S. enjoy the same freedom as their non-Chinese classmates and signaled a seeming escalation of pressures on Chinese students' and scholars' speech.

“This case is extremely disturbing,” said Kevin Carrico, a senior lecturer in Chinese studies at Monash University in Australia. “It demonstrates all too clearly that the [People's Republic of China] government is not only monitoring students’ speech abroad, but also actively investigating and prosecuting students for exercising free speech. The Chinese state is basically telling citizens who live abroad, ‘We own you.’”

Axios reported on the arrest of the student, 20-year-old Luo Daiqing, upon his return to his hometown in China last July. Axios cited a Chinese court document that accused Luo of having “used his Twitter account to post more than 40 comments denigrating a national leader's image and indecent pictures” in the fall of 2018, “while he was studying at the University of Minnesota.”

The tweets featured cartoon images of Winnie the Pooh -- a character censored in China since Web users began posting satirical images likening the bear to President Xi Jinping -- as well as images of a cartoon villain that bears a resemblance to Xi.

Luo was sentenced in November to six months’ imprisonment for “provocation,” with credit toward that six months for the time already spent in detention.

Luo did not return a message from Inside Higher Ed sent to an email address under his name found in the University of Minnesota's directory. The Minneapolis Star Tribune reported on Friday that it received an email from Luo's university email address confirming the prison sentence and saying he has been released and is staying in the Chinese city of Wuhan.

U.S. lawmakers have grown increasingly concerned about Chinese government efforts to exert influence over U.S. campus life or export state censorship. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, the co-chairman of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, was among the lawmakers who weighed in on Luo's arrest: “#China has sentenced a student to 6 months in prison for tweets he wrote while he was in the U.S. as a student,” Rubio said on Twitter. “Let that sink in …”

Faculty have raised concerns in the past about Chinese students’ seeming reluctance to speak openly in the classroom about issues that might be considered sensitive in China. A 2018 report on Chinese interference and influence in American higher education from the Wilson Center described several cases in which faculty “said they believe many of their students from the PRC do not enjoy academic freedom in the classroom because they are afraid someone will report them to the authorities if they are seen to engage in sensitive academic activities.”

A report on academic freedom and China from the academic freedom protection group Scholars at Risk released last fall raised similar concerns about efforts by Chinese authorities to punish speech they find displeasing, both within and outside China’s borders. SAR previously reported on a postdoctoral researcher at a Finnish university, Zhan Wang, who was detained last fall upon his entry to China on a personal visit, allegedly for his online expression.

“China has significant ambitions when it comes to higher education, and those ambitions necessitate international exchange, so China is seeking ways to maintain control of information in a global context,” said Clare Robinson, SAR’s director of advocacy. “We’ve been seeing surveillance efforts like student informants and threats to families still in China as a means of punishing those who speak critically, whether it be in an academic context or not.”

Robinson said that in the case of Luo's tweets she doesn’t think the content of the speech -- whether it was in an academic or extramural context -- is what is most important. “I think what’s important is that other scholars and students in and from China will take note of this detention and they’ll think twice maybe before tweeting, but also before publishing a paper, before raising their hands in class, before singing up a class in Politics in East Asia,” she said. “It will impact academic expression or inquiry that could be potentially displeasing to the [Chinese Communist] Party.”

The campus free speech group Foundation for Individual Rights in Education also raised concerns about Luo’s reported imprisonment and the damaging effect it could have on academic environments. “FIRE is deeply concerned by Luo's imprisonment for political comments he posted on Twitter while studying here in the United States,” said Sarah McLaughlin, the director of targeted advocacy at FIRE. “Academic communities flourish when all students, including international students, may speak freely without the threat of surveillance or punishment. No matter where they call home, students should not be forced to choose between peacefully expressing their beliefs and staying out of jail.”

Kris Olds, a professor of geography at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and an expert on the globalization of higher education, said on Twitter that the case raises a number of questions for international universities hosting Chinese students. Among them: “How much do the hard working staff in our International Student Services (& equivalent) units understand about the rise of global reach & ‘network sovereignty’ agendas associated with countries like China and Saudi Arabia?” he asked. “What obligations do our senior leaders … and those overseeing int'l student services have to working with int'l students from countries like China to understand and strategize about this phenomenon[?]”

“How can universities better understand when their int'l students are arrested in their countries of citizenship (for dubious reasons like this case)? Should they share accurate information about the arrests quickly & broadly? If so, who decides when & how[?]” Olds asked. “What obligations do our universities have to provide our arrested students & their families, in cases like this, with resources for legal support & broader political support in relevant contexts here & around the world? … What is the role of formal and informal associations of universities in responding to this phenomenon, recognizing that many universities do not have the scale of legal and area studies resources that the University of Minnesota does[?]”

Finally, he wrote, “Many int'l students have faced political challenges when ‘returning home’ -- this is not a completely new phenomenon. But digital platforms & associated surveillance agendas associated w ‘network sovereignty’ are new(ish). Do we have the capacity & expertise to act wisely[?]”

Carrico, the Monash senior lecturer, said he thinks Minnesota “needs to make a statement condemning this travesty of justice. And universities need to stand their ground and clarify that any intimidation of anyone for discussing China-related issues openly, honestly, even critically will not be accepted.”

A University of Minnesota spokesman, Jake Ricker, confirmed that a student by the name Luo Daiqing was enrolled in the College of Liberal Arts in 2018-19. Ricker said the university only learned of the situation last week after being contacted by media.

"This has been a difficult situation to monitor due to the lack of available, timely or complete information, but we were pleased to hear reports that the individual has been released from prison and returned home," Ricker said.

GlobalForeign StudentsEditorial Tags: Academic freedomChinaInternational higher educationForeign Students in U.S.Image Source: Getty ImagesIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box: 

A federal court opinion could put the policies and procedures of colleges and universities in California and the western U.S. under a microscope for their ability to prevent sexual assault.

An institution can be held liable for “pre-assault” claims, which allege that its policies for enforcing Title IX are inadequate, create an environment of “heightened risk” of sexual misconduct and lead a complainant to be harassed or assaulted, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declared in a ruling Thursday. The federal law prohibits discrimination based on sex at institutions that receive federal funding and requires them to investigate reports of sexual misconduct.

Three former students who allege they were assaulted at the University of California, Berkeley, in 2012 initially brought a case against the University of California system’s Board of Regents in 2015 for Berkeley's handling of their individual complaints. When the case was dismissed in district court, the women appealed.

While many of the recent federal court decisions on Title IX have focused on the rights of respondents, the Ninth Circuit opinion is “a big win for victims’ advocates,” especially if other appeals courts follow suit, said Peter Lake, director of the Law Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy at Stetson University.

The ruling by the three-judge panel of the Ninth Circult referenced a 2014 California State Auditor report of Berkeley’s processes under Title IX. The report found that from 2009 to 2013, Berkeley did not notify or give regular updates to parties involved in investigations of sexual misconduct, did not complete investigations in a timely manner and did not “sufficiently educate” staff and students on sexual misconduct prevention, which led cases to be mishandled and compromised student safety, according to the Ninth Circuit opinion.

Berkeley’s use of an “early resolution process” that addressed complaints of sexual assault without formal investigations also came under fire in the court’s opinion. It is standard for institutions to pursue early resolution or mediation between the complainant and respondent only in cases of sexual harassment and when both parties are in agreement, said Jake Sapp, deputy Title IX coordinator and compliance officer at Austin College, in Texas.

The former Berkeley students asserted that only two of the 500 cases of sexual misconduct reported to the university in 2012 were resolved in a “formal process” and that they were coerced into early resolution by the university. This was allegedly done so Berkeley did not have to report assaults under the Clery Act, which requires institutions to disclose crimes on their campuses, according to the students’ lawsuit.

Berkeley was ordered by the U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights to revise its Title IX policies after a 2014 investigation by the agency. The university subsequently “enacted many new policies, procedures and services over the last few years,” according to a February 2018 statement from the university.

But the opinion could open other colleges and universities in the California system and elsewhere in the states covered by the Ninth Circuit -- Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington -- to lawsuits that challenge the effectiveness of their Title IX policies, Lake said.

Contrary to other federal court opinions that address an institution’s “deliberate indifference” to or inaction on a report of sexual misconduct after the fact, the Ninth Circuit’s opinion discusses what is known as “before theory,” Lake said.

“If your state system does some analysis and finds inadequacies in terms of response, that’s something that they will take more seriously,” Lake said. “This is a different kind of argument: that the policies themselves shut the door before anyone is able to provide notice.”

The door is now open for plaintiffs to argue “before theory” in the Ninth Circuit. The opinion creates a broader standard than a similar case, Simpson v. University of Colorado, which said that colleges can be liable if there is knowledge of sexual misconduct in a specific program, said Brett Sokolow, president of the Association of Title IX Administrators. That case was decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, which covers Colorado.

"It may be easier to establish a causal link between a school’s policy of deliberate indifference and the plaintiff’s harassment when the heightened risk of harassment exists in a specific program," the Ninth Circuit opinion said. "But we will not foreclose the possibility that a plaintiff could adequately allege causation even when a school’s policy of deliberate indifference extends to sexual misconduct occurring across campus.ÔÇï"

The Ninth Circuit ruling did note that Title IX does not require California “to purge its campus of sexual misconduct to avoid liability” and that “a university is not responsible for guaranteeing the good behavior of its students.”

Sokolow believes most of the higher education institutions in California already hold a high standard for Title IX processes and will be unsurprised by this “progressive” opinion in the Ninth Circuit. But colleges and universities elsewhere might now look more closely at their admissions policies for “special admits” or transfer students, such as athletic scholarship recipients, for histories of sexual misconduct.

“It’s going to not only put individuals in the Ninth Circuit on alert but Title IX administrators across the nation,” Sapp said.

Andrew Miltenberg, a lawyer who represents students accused of sexual assault, said the hope is that colleges do not become “overly concerned” with pre-assault claims and pursue cases that are not strong enough for investigation and disciplinary measures against accused students.

“The hope is that universities will heed this and take measures to ensure that both Title IX complainants and respondents are treated fairly, equitably and given the due process protections that they deserve,” Miltenberg wrote in an email.

The case will now return to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which will decide whether to proceed with the claims against the Board of Regents based on the appeals court’s new standard.

Students and ViolenceEditorial Tags: Legal issuesSexual assaultTitle IXIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: University of California, BerkeleyDisplay Promo Box: 

A new ranking system for academic journals measuring their commitment to research transparency will be launched next month -- providing what many believe will be a useful alternative to journal impact scores.

Under a new initiative from the Center for Open Science, based in Charlottesville, Va., more than 300 scholarly titles in psychology, education and biomedical science will be assessed on 10 measures related to transparency, with their overall result for each category published in a publicly available table.

The center aims to provide scores for about 1,000 journals within six to eight months of the site’s launch in early February.

Among the measures of assessment are whether the publications ask authors to share their raw data or if they set standards for research design disclosure.

Other categories cover whether journals encourage the replication of studies and whether authors are required to preregister their experiments before data collection.

On data sharing, for example, journals would be given a one-out-of-three score for publishing a data availability statement, two for requiring authors to share data (subject to exceptions) and a full three out of three for providing enough data to enable full replication.

Journals will also receive credit if they offer the option of peer review before any research is undertaken -- a published format known as “registered reports,” used by more than 200 journals, in which assessors focus on research design rather than end results.

The new ranking system comes amid concerns over the difficulty of reproducing some of science’s most high-impact papers owing to large amounts of missing or withheld methodological data. Last week Brian Nosek, the center’s director, told Times Higher Education that a forthcoming paper on cancer research replication would be a “wake-up call” for science given how the weak methodology sections of most papers made reproduction impossible.

David Mellor, the center’s director of policy initiatives, said he believed the new table would “promote those who are doing the most to encourage open science.”

“We want to recognize those who are taking difficult steps to address bad practices,” said Mellor, who hoped journals would “require or reward open science practices that are not as common as they should be.”

Mellor added that he hoped the new scorecard system -- in which scores are decided by the center’s assessment teams based on publicly available information -- would provide an alternative to the current journal ranking system, which is based on citations per paper, known as journal impact.

“There is a clear pecking order based on impact, but this is really about a paper’s novelty or prestige, rather than [adhering to] core scientific values,” said Mellor.

Editorial Tags: PublishingTimes Higher EdIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box: 

Ever since being inspired by the activism of low-income high school students of color in Philadelphia in 2009, Jerusha Conner, a professor of education at Villanova University, has made youth activist movements the focus of her research.

A decade after she first began working with the Philadelphia Student Union, a youth-led organization that works to empower young people to demand high-quality education in the city's public school system, Conner has taken a new look at student activism on college campuses today.

In her upcoming book, The New Student Activists: The Rise of Neoactivism on College Campuses (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020), Conner reanalyzed a 2016 survey she and fellow researchers conducted among self-identified activists at 120 colleges and universities across the country. Conner used the students' answers to survey questions about who they are and the issues for which they advocate to form a picture of present-day student activists. ÔÇïShe analyzed their various strategies for change during a period that scholars have described American colleges and universities as drifting from their “civic mission of higher education” and “succumb[ing] to neoliberal pressure to prepare workers for the global economy.”

Q: Who is a “neoactivist” and what role do they have on college campuses?

A: A subset of the new student activists are “neoactivists,” who are characterized by their attention to historical legacies of activism, critical consciousness, intersectional perspective and commitment to assuming collective responsibility for shared public goods. They are “neo” insofar as they are reviving the efforts and modifying the tactics of earlier generations, and the vision and solutions they espouse contrast neoliberalism or market-based solutions that call for individuals to act in their own self-interest. More than half of the respondents in the survey sample targeted campus policies, practices or climate. They raised concerns about their institutions, called for change and worked to hold their schools’ leaders accountable.

Q: What were the most notable differences in strategy you found between student activists advocating for progressive and conservative agendas?

A: A very small share of the sample advocated for conservative causes. Both groups formed and joined campus-based clubs at similar rates, and they described similar levels of social media use, self-care practice and passion for their causes. They were also similarly connected to national organizations that seek to organize and support students. The conservative student activists tended to have fewer marginalized identities than the progressive students, and they embraced significantly fewer causes than their neoactivist counterparts, who supported eight causes on average. The conservative students also tended to focus more on changing individual hearts and minds than on affecting institutional or social policy, compared to their neoactivist peers.

Q: What has been the response of colleges and universities to student activist pressure?

A: In some cases, institutions have chosen to work with the activists: holding high-level or public discussions, inviting them to speak to the Board of Trustees, providing them with funding to attend national conferences. In other cases, institutions have threatened activists with disciplinary sanctions or simply ignored them altogether. One respondent described how her institution sought to placate her and her peers by “talking [the issue] to death,” referring their concerns to committees that never seemed to accomplish anything. Some institutions have made symbolic changes in response to activist demands, while others have made more substantial changes. In general, I found greater institutional support for student activists at smaller, private liberal arts colleges than large public schools, which in some cases were facing budget cuts and political pressure to clamp down on student activism.

Q: What is the role of social media in modern student activist movements?

A: Although only 64 percent of respondents reported using social media regularly for their activism, those who did explained that it was a very useful tool for recruiting new members, mobilizing students for actions, learning from similar groups on different campuses and building a sense of community and solidarity. Several respondents also described developing a stronger understanding of issues or a deeper critical perspective by reading fellow activists’ posts. At the same time, student activists in this study voiced disdain for “hashtag activism,” or activism that was only performed online.

Q: Are modern student activist movements more intersectional than past movements, and has this approach been effective?

A: Neoactivists are attentive to both the multifaceted nature of identity as it relates to power and privilege and the interconnections among issues of injustice. Whereas it might have been more common in the past for a student activist to plant a stake firmly in one social movement or another, more than half of respondents indicated that their activism addressed seven or more interconnected issues. Although an intersectional perspective was certainly present at the periphery of earlier movements, it has moved to the mainstream for the current generation.

Q: Do you believe student activists are the primary agents of social change?

A: I believe that student activists have an important role to play in calling attention to what they see as wrong, proposing correctives and demanding action and accountability from leaders. They often speak with a sense of moral urgency that I find moving. Of the student activists in this book, 93 percent expected to continue their activism beyond college and incorporate it into their careers. The new student activists’ commitment to taking action to address social wrongs runs deep.

Editorial Tags: BooksIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box: 

• Kimo Ah Yun, acting provost at Marquette University, in Wisconsin, has been named to the job on a permanent basis.
• Andrew Armacost, dean of the faculty at the U.S. Air Force Academy, in Colorado, has been appointed president of the University of North Dakota.
• Barbara Bichelmeyer, provost and executive vice chancellor at the University of Missouri at Kansas City, has been chosen as provost and executive vice chancellor at the University of Kansas.
• Daniel Diermeier, provost at the University of Chicago, in Illinois, has been selected as chancellor of Vanderbilt University, in Tennessee.
• Anthony Jenkins, president of West Virginia State University, has been appointed president of Coppin State University, in Maryland.
• Daniel F. Mahony, president of Winthrop University, in South Carolina, has been selected as president of the Southern Illinois University system.
• Karl Solibakke, chief operating officer at Northland College, in Wisconsin, has been promoted to president there.
• Kyle Stafford, vice president of university advancement at Southeastern Oklahoma State University, has been appointed president of Northeastern Oklahoma A&M College.
• Deborah Terry, vice chancellor of Curtin University, in Australia, has been chosen as vice chancellor and president of the University of Queensland, also in Australia.
• Leslie Ward, interim president of Vermont College of Fine Arts, has been named to the job on a permanent basis.

Editorial Tags: College administrationNew presidentsIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box: