Thursday, January 30, 2025
Colombia, first nationals deported under the Donald Trump administration arrived (TeleSur English)
The first flights carrying migrants deported from the United States to Colombia. The Colombian government confirmed on Tuesday that two planes
carrying migrants had landed. Some were reportedly shackled. A total of 201 migrants: 110 sent from
California and 90 from Texas were on board. Among the deportees were two pregnant women and more than 20 children. The cost to US taxpayers is estimated to be $100,000 to $700,000 per flight. The long-term costs and consequences of this program with Latin America, like many others over the last century, have not been estimated.
TOMORROW: "Are Working Class Voters Done with Democrats?" (CUNY School of Labor and Urban Stidies)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Stop Campus Hazing Act: What You Need to Know (Clery Center)
UPDATE: The Stop Campus Hazing Act was signed into law by President Biden on December 23, 2024. We have edited the below blog to reflect this update.
The Stop Campus Hazing Act (SCHA) amends section 485(f) of the Higher Education Act, otherwise known as the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act). Notably, the bill also changes the name of the Clery Act to the “Jeanne Clery Campus Safety Act”, representing the Act’s evolution in addressing broad campus safety needs.
Clery Center partnered with Gary and Julie DeVercelly, whose son, Gary DeVercelly, Jr. died by hazing in 2007, to begin advocating for federal anti-hazing legislation in 2014. These efforts led to the introduction of the Report and Education About Campus Hazing (REACH) Act in 2017, which was combined with elements of the END ALL Hazing Act to create the Stop Campus Hazing Act.
What will campuses be required to do?
The Stop Campus Hazing Act has three primary components: Inclusion of hazing statistics in annual security reports: Colleges and universities will need to include statistics for hazing incidents that were reported to campus security authorities or local law enforcement, as defined by SCHA, in their annual security reports.
Implementation of hazing policies, including those specific to hazing prevention: Colleges and universities will be required to have a hazing policy with information on how to make a report of hazing and the process used to investigate hazing incidents. They must also have a policy that addresses hazing prevention and awareness programs, which includes a description of research-informed campus-wide prevention programs and primary prevention strategies.
Compilation of a Campus Hazing Transparency Report: Each institution must compile and publish on a prominent location of their public website a hazing transparency report that summarizes findings concerning any student organization found to be in violation of the institution’s standards of conduct related to hazing. The report will include: The name of the student organization; A general description of the violation that resulted in a finding of responsibility; and Related dates (the date of the alleged incident, the date of the initiation of the investigation, the date the investigation ended with a finding, and the date the institution provided notice to the organization of the finding).
When will implementation start?
The timeline for implementation is as follows: January 1, 2025: Institutions should begin collecting hazing statistics to include in the annual security report.
June 23, 2025: Hazing policies must be in place.
July 1, 2025: Institutions must have a process for documenting violations of the institution’s standards of conduct relating to hazing.
December 23, 2025: The Campus Hazing Transparency Report, which includes the violations that institutions begin documenting in July, must be publicly available. The Campus Hazing Transparency Report must be updated at least two times a year.
October 1, 2026: Hazing statistics will first be included in the 2026 annual security report (2025 statistics).
How can I start planning for these changes?Register for our three-part Stop Campus Hazing Act training series:February 26 - Session 1: Hazing as a Clery Act Crime Statistic
March 5 - Session 2: Hazing Prevention Programming Requirements
March 12 - Session 3:Campus Hazing Transparency Report
Review your process for notifying and training campus security authorities on their responsibilities, as well as forms or systems used for incident reporting. Plan to update these materials to include hazing.
Determine what hazing policies already exist on campus and whether they address hazing prevention and awareness.
Bring together roles that will be involved in implementation of these requirements (including conduct professionals, public safety, and prevention educators) to discuss what policies or procedures may need to be updated.
View Clery Center's and StopHazing's free webinar to learn more about the Stop Campus Hazing Act.
Stay tuned for more information about our training series launching this winter.
The Stop Campus Hazing Act (SCHA) amends section 485(f) of the Higher Education Act, otherwise known as the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act). Notably, the bill also changes the name of the Clery Act to the “Jeanne Clery Campus Safety Act”, representing the Act’s evolution in addressing broad campus safety needs.
Clery Center partnered with Gary and Julie DeVercelly, whose son, Gary DeVercelly, Jr. died by hazing in 2007, to begin advocating for federal anti-hazing legislation in 2014. These efforts led to the introduction of the Report and Education About Campus Hazing (REACH) Act in 2017, which was combined with elements of the END ALL Hazing Act to create the Stop Campus Hazing Act.
What will campuses be required to do?
The Stop Campus Hazing Act has three primary components: Inclusion of hazing statistics in annual security reports: Colleges and universities will need to include statistics for hazing incidents that were reported to campus security authorities or local law enforcement, as defined by SCHA, in their annual security reports.
Implementation of hazing policies, including those specific to hazing prevention: Colleges and universities will be required to have a hazing policy with information on how to make a report of hazing and the process used to investigate hazing incidents. They must also have a policy that addresses hazing prevention and awareness programs, which includes a description of research-informed campus-wide prevention programs and primary prevention strategies.
Compilation of a Campus Hazing Transparency Report: Each institution must compile and publish on a prominent location of their public website a hazing transparency report that summarizes findings concerning any student organization found to be in violation of the institution’s standards of conduct related to hazing. The report will include: The name of the student organization; A general description of the violation that resulted in a finding of responsibility; and Related dates (the date of the alleged incident, the date of the initiation of the investigation, the date the investigation ended with a finding, and the date the institution provided notice to the organization of the finding).
When will implementation start?
The timeline for implementation is as follows: January 1, 2025: Institutions should begin collecting hazing statistics to include in the annual security report.
June 23, 2025: Hazing policies must be in place.
July 1, 2025: Institutions must have a process for documenting violations of the institution’s standards of conduct relating to hazing.
December 23, 2025: The Campus Hazing Transparency Report, which includes the violations that institutions begin documenting in July, must be publicly available. The Campus Hazing Transparency Report must be updated at least two times a year.
October 1, 2026: Hazing statistics will first be included in the 2026 annual security report (2025 statistics).
How can I start planning for these changes?Register for our three-part Stop Campus Hazing Act training series:February 26 - Session 1: Hazing as a Clery Act Crime Statistic
March 5 - Session 2: Hazing Prevention Programming Requirements
March 12 - Session 3:Campus Hazing Transparency Report
Review your process for notifying and training campus security authorities on their responsibilities, as well as forms or systems used for incident reporting. Plan to update these materials to include hazing.
Determine what hazing policies already exist on campus and whether they address hazing prevention and awareness.
Bring together roles that will be involved in implementation of these requirements (including conduct professionals, public safety, and prevention educators) to discuss what policies or procedures may need to be updated.
View Clery Center's and StopHazing's free webinar to learn more about the Stop Campus Hazing Act.
Stay tuned for more information about our training series launching this winter.
Wednesday, January 29, 2025
Raw Deals in Higher Education
In a 2022 interview with Gary Stocker of College Vialbility App, we discussed the idea of bad deals in higher education. And as the College Meltdown advances, we expect many more bad deals to occur, both for institutions and consumers.
Already, in early 2025, we have seen documentation of the collapse of St. Augustine University, a 146-year old HBCU in North Carolina. We expect many more collapses and closures like this, and difficult mergers, to occur in the coming years. The immense greed we saw in for-profit higher education a decade ago we'll see in public and non-profit private education.
HEI will attempt to document these events not merely as news, but as part of a larger pattern of criminality in US higher education, not just at the institutional level, but at the state and federal level, and with predatory banks and other investors who are working on these deals behind the scenes. We also plan to explain how this predatory behavior damages communities. Communities with people.
HELU's Wall-to-Wall and Coast-to-Coast Report – January 2025
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Absurdism: Living HAPPILY in a World Without Meaning (Albert Camus)
Albert Camus's philosophy of Absurdism provides a unique approach to the meaning of life. He explores the tension between humanity's deep desire for meaning and the universe's lack of answers, coining this contradiction as "the absurd." His philosophy rejects nihilism and encourages us to embrace life’s limitations, living fully in the present and finding purpose through personal choices rather than ultimate truths.
In The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus likens life to Sisyphus's endless task of pushing a boulder up a hill, only for it to roll back down—a metaphor for the repetitive, sometimes purposeless cycle of human existence. Instead of succumbing to despair, Camus suggests that we imagine Sisyphus finding joy in the struggle itself, symbolizing a resilient, defiant spirit.
Tuesday, January 28, 2025
New Findings Highlight Borrowers' Student Loan Repayment Challenges and Impact on Key Milestones (Laurel Road)
[Editor's note: The Higher Education Inquirer is presenting this press release for information only. This is not an endorsement of the organizations mentioned in article.]
NEW YORK, Jan. 27, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- A new survey, The Student Debt Dilemma: The Impact on Financial Milestones, released today by Laurel Road, a digital banking platform of KeyBank with specialized offerings for healthcare and business professionals, in partnership with Luminary, a global professional education and networking platform, and conducted by Kantar, reveals the obstacles borrowers face in managing student loan repayment – from information overload to confidence gaps.
The survey of 1,714 U.S. adults found that 70% felt overwhelmed when navigating repayment options, with 76% of respondents experiencing an overload of information, underscoring the significant anxiety and confusion faced by borrowers. These findings underscore the impact of debt on milestone life events as well as the difficulty of navigating an intricate repayment system.
Challenges amid Regulatory Changes
Recent
changes and fluctuating regulations in the federal student loan system
have created ongoing uncertainty for borrowers navigating their
repayment options. According to the survey, 82% of respondents aged 25
to 44 reported feeling "unsure what plans/options are right for me,"
demonstrating the ever-changing environment as a primary pain point.
Additionally, 58% of individuals in the combined 25-44 age group reported feeling moderately overwhelmed – a significantly higher percentage compared to the 45 and older age group (34.8%)– emphasizing the unique challenges younger borrowers face in making informed decisions.
Low Levels of Confidence in Repayment Strategies
Navigating
student loan repayment is a complicated process, requiring borrowers to
understand available options, conduct thorough research to identify
loan management opportunities, and select the most appropriate repayment
plan or forgiveness program.
According to the survey, 26% of respondents noted that they did not have a plan for managing their student loans, while 20% indicated they planned to use Federal Income-Driven Repayment, and 15% intended to pursue the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program.
Confidence is another major concern, as 61% of borrowers surveyed reported a lack of confidence in their repayment strategies while only 13% reported feeling confident in their approach.
"This study confirms everything we believed to be true relating to confusion and lack of confidence student loan borrowers face today. Information overload and ambiguity has left borrowers yearning to understand the repayment and forgiveness options available to them, and to receive this information in a clear, concise manner," said Alyssa Schaefer, General Manager and Chief Experience Officer at Laurel Road. "Laurel Road is at the forefront of helping borrowers gain their confidence by offering free consultations with student loan experts who can help them make informed decisions, navigate the complexities of repayment, and build the confidence needed to reach their financial goals – ultimately securing their financial futures."
Impact of Student Loans on Financial Futures
In
addition to being difficult to navigate, the student loan landscape has
the potential to largely affect borrowers' overall financial well-being
and long-term goals. The survey revealed that student loan debt has
delayed significant life milestones for respondents, with borrowers
reporting the following impacts:
- 79% struggle to save for emergencies or retirement
- 75% are unable to invest for the future
- 52% are unable to purchase a home
- 35% are postponing starting a family
"Luminary has seen first-hand the impact of student loan debt on our Members, from a lack of understanding about available options to the affect it has on an individual's mental health due to stress, worry and anxiety, " said Luminary founder and CEO Cate Luzio. "While this isn't new information for us, given our longstanding partnership with Laurel Road, we felt this survey was necessary to demonstrate the real toll it's taking on people. As we prepare for a new administration in 2025, this is top of mind as we continue developing programming to educate and inform those affected."
Delays in life milestones not only affect individual wellbeing but also pose broader risks to economic stability and financial security. Through online resources and student loan consultations, borrowers can gain confidence in understanding and tackling student loan repayment and get on track for important financial milestones.
For additional results from this survey, visit http://laurelroad.com/resources/financial-survey-student-debt-dilemma/
Methodology
This survey was conducted online from September 30, 2024, to October 31,
2024 among 1,714 U.S. adults with either private or federal student
loans, by Luminary and the Kantar Profiles Respondent Hub. The primary
age group analyzed ranged from 25–44 years old, though responses were
collected from ages 18–65+. The gender breakdown of the respondents was
47% male, 51% female, 2% non-binary, and 0.4% preferring not to answer.
Statistical significance testing was completed between groups to ensure
the results did not occur by chance.
About Laurel Road
Laurel
Road is a digital banking platform and brand of KeyBank that provides
tailored offerings to support the financial wellbeing of healthcare and
business professionals. Laurel Road's banking and lending solutions –
including Checking and High Yield Savings accounts, Student Loan
Forgiveness Counseling, Student Loan Refinancing, Mortgages, Personal
Loans, and more – provide our members with a simplified, personalized
experience that helps them better navigate their financial journey with
ease.
Laurel Road has reimagined banking and financial management for physicians and dentists through Laurel Road for Doctors, a tailored digital experience made up of banking, insights, and exclusive benefits to provide the financial help and peace of mind they need through each career stage. In spring of 2022, Laurel Road also launched Loyalty Checking, the first checking account designed with nurses in mind, furthering the company's commitment to healthcare professionals. Visit www.laurelroad.com for more information.
About Luminary
Luminary is
a global membership-based professional education and networking
platform created to address and impact the systemic challenges faced by
women and underrepresented communities across all industries and
sectors, and through all phases of their professional journey. Founded
in 2018 by former finance executive Cate Luzio, Luminary is a dynamic,
gender-inclusive, multi-generational, and intersectional community
focused on creating connection, collaboration, and change through global
expert- and Member-led programming, as well as services, activations,
content, and culture. In addition, Members have access to perks and
amenities including a vast digital content library; a five-floor
building in the heart of NoMad in New York City
that is home to work and social spaces, including a rooftop restaurant;
and entree to Luminary's international Partner Network
of women-forward communities. Luminary continues to build its ecosystem
of high-touch engagement for both individual and enterprise members and
has grown to be a multimillion-dollar global B2C and B2B business with
more than 15,000 members and over 100 enterprise members. In late 2023,
the company acquired The Cru to add to its robust product offering, and
in January 2025 announced its acquisition of Hey Mama.
Media Contact: laurelroadpr@kwtglobal.com
U of Idaho President Seems To Temper His Cheerleading for U of Phoenix Purchase (David Halperin)
In testimony Monday before a joint committee of the Idaho legislature, University of Idaho president C. Scott Green seemed a little less committed to the deal he has relentlessly touted for more than a year and a half — for his school to buy, for $685 million, the huge for-profit University of Phoenix from private equity giant Apollo Global Management.
According to Idaho Education News, Green said the next move was Apollo’s. “We’re waiting to hear what they would like to do,” Green said.
Green’s plan has been thwarted again and again, with negative votes in the Idaho legislature, a successful court challenge by the state’s attorney general, criticism from the state treasurer, and sharp scrutiny from news outlets in the state.
The Green school deal has assumed that operation of Phoenix would bring millions in new revenue to fund his university. But it ignores that running a for-profit college, one that has repeatedly gotten in trouble with law enforcement, would be a tremendous challenge: If Green pushed to end Phoenix’s predatory practices and improve student outcomes, it probably would start losing money, because predatory practices, coupled with high prices and low spending on education, have made up the school’s secret sauce. But if Green allowed the deceptive conduct to persist, the school could face more legal peril. And, whatever route he took, Green’s school might end up assuming massive liability for student loan debt the government has cancelled based on past abuses at Phoenix.
At its peak, Phoenix was the largest for-profit college in the country and got upwards of $2 billion a year in federal student aid, while boasting dismal graduation rates and high levels of loan defaults.
Last summer, the University of Idaho and Apollo agreed to a one-year extension of their purchase deal. That arrangement expires June 10. Meanwhile Apollo has the right to talk with other potential buyers.
Apollo already has sent Idaho $5 million to cover the school’s high-priced legal and consulting fees in connection with the deal, and it has agreed to pay up to $20 million to Idaho if the deal falls through.
Green told the legislature that $20 million would cover his school’s costs with perhaps $2 to $3 to spare. “I think we’re well-protected,” he boasted.
Kind of. Green, whose background is in corporate management and finance, could potentially walk away without losing money for the school. But he has tied up state university, executive, legislative, and judicial resources for many hundreds of hours jousting over an effort that would keep alive a predatory school that has buried thousands of graduates in debt they can’t afford to repay, while wasting billions in federal taxpayer dollars, when that time could have been focused on the real challenges of state higher education.
If Idaho can’t work out a deal, Apollo may run out of options to dump the school, and this taxpayer-funded multi-billion dollar disgrace may at last be put down.
[Editor's note: This article originally appeared on Republic Report.]
The future of the US Department of Education: 8 tips for journalists covering the agency under Trump’s second term
The U.S. Department of Education, one of the federal government’s smallest Cabinet-level agencies, operates programs across every level of education. With an annual budget of about $242 billion, it helps fund approximately 98,000 public schools and 32,000 private schools serving kindergarten through grade 12 as well as thousands of colleges, universities, vocational schools and other higher education institutions.
During his reelection campaign, President Donald Trump pledged to close the U.S. Department of Education if he returned to the White House. In the months leading to his inauguration on Monday, some Republican state leaders and members of Congress expressed support for his proposal, although it is still unclear how he would implement it.
In Oklahoma, for example, Ryan Walters, the state superintendent of public instruction, has formed a committee to oversee the changes in federal education policy he expects the Trump administration to make.
“The education system has needed these reforms for decades,” Walters told FOX23 News Tulsa in November. “We’re going to be the first state ready to go to enact them.”
Even if the federal Education Department remains intact, which academic researchers and other experts assert is most likely, there probably will be changes. Trump has said he plans to use federal funding as leverage to limit what he considers “left-wing indoctrination” in K-12 schools and higher education institutions.
He has made it clear that he opposes so called “diversity programs” as well as school vaccine requirements, teaching critical race theory in K-12 classrooms and allowing transgender students to participate in sports that align with their gender identity.
“The big question isn’t whether the Department of Education is going to go away -- I think the big question is what it’s going to do,” says education historian Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania who wrote the books Whose America? Culture Wars in the Public Schools and The Amateur Hour: A History of College Teaching in America.
We created this tip sheet to help journalists tackle this very complicated issue. Below, we spotlight eight tips to help you better understand the Education Department’s role, put Trump’s plan into historical context, and examine possible consequences for students, families, educators and their communities.
1. Make clear what the U.S. Department of Education does and that most of its funding is spent on programs for adults.
Many people don’t realize the U.S. Department of Education spends most of its budget on education and training for adults, namely college students, students enrolled in career and technical programs, and people with disabilities who need help finding jobs. In fiscal year 2024, the Education Department spent about $161 billion -- 60% of its $268 billion budget -- to fund its office of Federal Student Aid, the country’s largest provider of student financial aid.
Another $2 billion went to the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, which administers a variety of education and training programs for adults, including adults with disabilities and incarcerated individuals. About $4 billion went to the Office of Postsecondary Education, which, among other things, provides grants for colleges controlled by tribal governments and for other minority serving institutions. The Rutgers Center for Minority Serving Institutions maintains a list of MSIs, which are public and private colleges and universities that serve a large percentage of Black, Hispanic, Asian or Indigenous students.
K-12 public schools receive relatively little money from the U.S. Department of Education. In fact, less than 8% of public school revenue came from federal agencies, including the Education Department, before COVID-19 reached the U.S. in 2020. Since then, the federal government has sent schools a combined $189.5 billion in emergency aid to help them deal with the wide-ranging impacts of the pandemic.
This temporary infusion of money bumped the federal government's share of public school funding to 13.7% during the 2021-22 academic year, the most recent year for which data is available.
The U.S. Department of Education’s largest K-12 programs are grant programs, designed to help public schools afford the higher cost of educating certain groups of students. For example, special education grants help schools pay for education and services for students with disabilities until they turn 21 years old. The Title I program, which gets its name from Title I of the federal law known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, provides financial assistance to schools where at least 40% students come from lower-income families.
A key function of the U.S. Department of Education is investigating civil rights complaints at K-12 schools, colleges, universities, trade schools and the other institutions it funds. Meanwhile, the agency’s research arm, the Institute of Education Sciences, collects a variety of education data and publishes regular reports on topics such as K-12 student demographics, high school graduation rates, college costs and college enrollment trends.
2. Note that some federal education programs are funded by other government agencies.
Much of the public probably does not realize that several major education programs are not run by the U.S. Department of Education. For example:
- Head Start, which provides education-related services to preschool children from low-income families, is funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
- The National School Lunch Program and the School Breakfast Program are funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
- While the Education Department provides some funding for K-12 schools controlled by tribal governments, most comes from the Bureau of Indian Education, part of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Some K-12 schools located on tribal land are operated and funded by the Bureau of Indian Education, which also funds and operates two tribal higher education institutions: the Haskell Indian Nations University in Kansas and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute in New Mexico.
- The GI Bill, which helps military veterans and their family members pay for college and other types of education, is funded by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
- The primary federal agencies that provide research funding to colleges and universities are the National Science Foundation, Department of Defense, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Energy, National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Department of Agriculture.
3. Emphasize that closing the U.S. Department of Education has been a goal of conservative politicians for decades.
Several high-ranking Republicans have sought to eliminate the Education Department since it opened in 1980 under Democratic President Jimmy Carter. Ronald Reagan, who won the presidential election that year, announced his plan to shutter it during his first State of the Union address.
“In campaigning for the presidency, Mr. Reagan called for the total elimination of the U.S. Department of Education, severe curtailment of bilingual education, and massive cutbacks in the federal role in education,” education historian Gary K. Clabaugh writes in “The Educational Legacy of Ronald Reagan,” published in the academic journal Educational Horizons in 2004.
Bob Dole, the Republican presidential nominee in 1996, also advocated for closure, as did Trump and several other Republicans competing for the U.S. presidency in 2024. Former Vice President Mike Pence, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum and biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy have all said they would eliminate the Education Department.
Shortly after Trump’s reelection in November, U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican from South Dakota, introduced the “Returning Education to Our States Act.” The bill seeks to abolish the Department of Education and transfer its programs and responsibilities to other federal agencies. For example, the Department of the Treasury would take over federal financial aid programs and the Department of Health and Human Services would administer the special education program.
U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, introduced bills in 2017, 2019, 2021 and 2023 to either terminate or reduce the size of the Education Department.
4. Explain what it would take to close the U.S. Department of Education.
Closing the Education Department would require federal legislation and, likely, a supermajority vote in the U.S. Senate. Although senators can pass bills with a simple majority vote, it takes a supermajority vote to halt discussion on a bill so a vote can take place.
That means that unless the Senate eliminates its filibuster rule, which often has been used to block controversial legislation, three-fifths of senators would have to vote in favor of closing the debate on such a bill to allow a vote. Political observers have said they doubt 60 of the 100 senators would vote in favor of that. Only 53 are Republicans.
Less than two years ago, the U.S. House of Representatives considered a legislative amendment that endorsed moving K-12 education programs out of the Department of Education. It failed, with 60 Republicans and 205 Democrats voting against it.
The Education Department generally enjoys bipartisan support, Pedro Noguera, dean of the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California, explained recently on a podcast he co-hosts and in an essay he co-wrote for The Hill.
“There are a lot of red states, red communities across the country that benefit from the policies and the programs,” Noguera said on the “Sparking Equity” podcast.
Education scholar Frederick Hess supports closing the department but says it will not happen. Not only do Republicans lack the votes to make the change, they have shown little interest in cutting programs that serve lower-income kids and kids with disabilities, says Hess, an executive editor of the Education Next journal, which, like The Journalist's Resource, is housed at Harvard Kennedy School.
Hess is also director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, and the author of several books on education policy, including "Getting Education Right: A Conservative Vision for Improving Early Childhood, K–12, and College" and "The Great School Rethink."
"What really matters for people who want to shrink the federal role or change it is: What are we changing about spending and rules and regulations?" he says, adding that journalists need to examine how the current rules for spending federal education dollars harm K-12 students. For one, he notes, they create a lot of paperwork for teachers at a time when public schools are struggling to hire and retain teachers, particularly special education teachers.
Says Hess: "There's a real opportunity here to look at the role of federal aid and the use of federal funds -- how are they used and are they actually creating budgetary problems rather than solving them?"
5. Provide your audiences with a realistic sense of how K-12 and higher education could be affected by an Education Department closure.
Educators, school administrators, policymakers and academic researchers have all speculated on how an Education Department closure could impact federal education funding and programs. Ten journalists from the Hechinger Report, a nonprofit news outlet that focuses on education issues, teamed up recently to examine that question. The resulting article is a must-read for journalists covering this topic.
Among its main takeaways: Abolishing the agency would not undo federal laws that established federal funding for K-12 programs that serve some of the nation’s most marginalized students, including students with disabilities and those from lower-income families. “But doling out that money and overseeing it could get messy,” the outlet reports.
Marguerite Roza, a research professor who studies education finances at Georgetown University, has said funding for K-12 schools probably would not change much.
“We've been telling school districts, ‘Don't expect massive changes in your federal dollars,’” Roza, who directs Georgetown’s Edunomics Lab, said in a Dec. 12 interview on a podcast produced by the right-leaning Defense of Freedom Institute for Policy Studies.
Meanwhile, higher education scholars like Marybeth Gasman, the Samuel DeWitt Proctor Endowed Chair in Education at Rutgers University, are concerned about college funding. She’s especially worried about funding aimed at helping marginalized youth get to and through college. Trump and some other conservative lawmakers have expressed disdain for so-called “diversity programs.”
A drop in funding could be devastating for minority serving institutions, which serve close to half of all U.S. college students who are racial or ethnic minorities, says Gasman, who is also executive director of both the Rutgers Center for Minority Serving Institutions and the Samuel DeWitt Proctor Institute for Leadership, Equity & Justice.
For example, 25% of Historically Black Colleges and Universities’ revenue came from the federal Education Department in fiscal year 2022, according to a report released last month by the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association. At the same time, most students enrolled at HBCUs qualify for Pell grants, a type of financial aid the Education Department offers lower-income students that they do not pay back.
Most minority serving institutions, commonly referred to as MSIs, are designated as Hispanic serving institutions because a large percentage of their students are Hispanic. They get 18% of their revenue directly from the Education Department grants. Many of their students also qualify for Pell grants.
“There needs to be more exploration into the ramifications of Trump’s presidency on MSIs,” Gasman says. “If they change loan forgiveness [policies], if they change Pell [grants], if they change aid to MSIs, it will have profound impacts.”
6. Evaluate how well the U.S. Department of Education runs its programs.
When President Jimmy Carter signed the Department of Education Organization Act, which created the Education Department, he said he wanted to ensure Americans got a better return on their investment in education. He said the new department would, among other things, save tax dollars and make federal education programs more accountable and responsive.
Has the department accomplished those goals? That’s a question journalists should try to answer for their audiences. Here are resources to get you started:
- Investigative reports from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, often referred to as Congress’ watchdog. The office examines the use of public funds and makes recommendations for improvement.
- Performance Results Reports and Congressional Reports compiled by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Inspector General. The purpose of that office is to “promote the efficiency, effectiveness, and integrity of the Department’s programs and operations through independent and objective audits, investigations, inspections, and other activities.”
- The National Center for Education Statistics provides an assortment of data on various K-12 student groups, including students who participate in Title I, special education and English language acquisition programs. It also provides data on students who participate in federal higher education programs, including the graduation rates of lower-income college students who receive Pell grants, one type of federal financial aid.
- The Congressional Research Service, which assists Congress in researching issues and creating laws and policies, regularly releases reports focusing on Education Department programs.
- Researchers have studied the effectiveness of the Title I program specifically, although no academic articles have been published in recent years. An analysis from George Mason University’s School of Policy, Government and International Affairs, updated in 2015, looks at the results of national assessments of the Title I program conducted from 1966 to 2013. It finds “little evidence that Title I has contributed significantly to closing achievement gaps nationwide.” A 2015 analysis by the Brookings Institution, a centrist think tank, asserts that the Title I program “doesn’t work,” in part because Title 1 “is spread so thin that its budget of $14 billion a year turns out not to be much money.”
- Some school districts have hired the American Institutes for Research to review their special education programs. A handful of recent reviews are posted on the organization’s website, and others could be obtained directly from school districts through public records requests.
- Several academic journal articles examine the burden of paperwork associated with federal K-12 education programs. In a paper published in 2023, for example, researchers write that “excessive paperwork” is a main reason special education teachers leave the field.
- A June 2024 analysis from EdSource, a nonprofit news outlet in California, finds that students who are learning to speak English do worse on California’s state exam the longer they are enrolled in the federal English language acquisition program.
- Many news outlets have reported on the Education Department’s botched rollout of the new FAFSA -- the Free Application for Federal Student Aid -- that students must submit to determine their eligibility for college grants and loans.
7. Find out whether state Education Departments are prepared to take on additional duties if the U.S. Department of Education closes.
Trump and many other influential Republicans want states to oversee their own education programs. But it is unclear which responsibilities would be transferred from the federal Education Department and how changes would be rolled out. What also is unclear is whether individual states are ready and able to take on these new duties.
It’s well known that state and local governments struggled with staffing during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in law enforcement, public health and education. Hiring has picked up recently, but some human resource managers have reported an uptick in resignations and retirements, according to a 2024 analysis conducted on behalf of the National Association of State Personnel Executives and the Public Sector HR Association. Some of the hiring officials surveyed for that report also said they expect a major wave of retirements during the next few years.
Veteran education journalist Daarel Burnette recommends journalists visit state Education Departments and look into how well they are handling their current workloads.
“You can just walk into those buildings and see rows and rows of empty desks -- they look like newsrooms,” says Burnette, a senior editor at The Chronicle of Higher Education and a former assistant managing editor and reporter for Education Week.
He notes that state education officials have been widely criticized for their response to the pandemic and the decline of K-12 students’ test scores in the wake of it. Individual legislators and the American Civil Liberties Union have requested investigations into the alleged misuse of schools’ COVID-19 relief funds.
The federal Education Department’s Office of the Inspector General has released several reports investigating individual state’s use of those funds. In December 2024, a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives released a 557-page report examining the nation’s response to the pandemic, indicating that “[t]he unprecedented scale and lack of transparency in COVID-19 pandemic relief programs exposed vulnerabilities for waste, fraud, and abuse.”
8. Ask education experts about angles and issues you have not yet considered.
Even if the Education Department is not dismantled, close federal scrutiny could easily open the door for other conversations about funding cuts and changes to the agency’s programs and procedures. Journalists should ask education researchers and other experts for help identifying issues the public needs to know about.
Laura Enriquez, director of the University of California Collaborative to Promote Immigrant and Student Equity, urges journalists to look beyond their regular sources and ask about students the news media tend to overlook. For example, while journalists frequently report on how public policies affect unauthorized immigrants, their coverage does not often include children born in the U.S. to parents who are unauthorized immigrants, she says.
These individuals can face challenges accessing programs and services that government agencies provide to U.S. citizens. Last year, these students had trouble submitting their FAFSA forms to obtain financial aid for college if their parents did not have social security numbers, says Enriquez, who is also an associate professor of Chicano/Latino studies and director of the Center for Liberation, Anti-racism, and Belonging at the University of California, Irvine.
“There are so many ways to tinker with aid award formulas and make the process more complicated than it already is for first-generation college students, racial minorities and citizens with undocumented parents,” she says.
She urges journalists to routinely ask themselves who is missing from their coverage. She adds: “The question you need to ask of yourself as a reporter is ‘Who else could be impacted through social ties?’ That’s a guiding question I wish more reporters asked of themselves.”
This article first appeared on The Journalist's Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)