Lumina Foundation is working to increase the share of adults in the U.S. labor force with college degrees or other credentials of value leading to economic prosperity.
Most public colleges receive state funding based on "seat time"—how many students are sitting through classes. Over a decade ago, leaders at Texas State Technical College decided to test out something entirely different: an experimental funding model that ties state support to the employment outcomes of their graduates.
In this interview, the architect of that innovative approach, Michael Bettersworth, discusses the lessons that all types of colleges can take from rethinking funding models to better match their missions.
Long before St. John's University decided to dismantle its faculty union, American higher education had already undergone a seismic structural shift in who teaches.
Since the 1970s, the share of faculty off the tenure track has risen relentlessly. Today, full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty make up barely a quarter of the instructional workforce. The rest—adjunct professors, lecturers, visiting instructors, and graduate teaching assistants—constitute what critics have called a shadow faculty: doing the work of the university at a fraction of the cost, with little job security, few benefits, and no meaningful path to permanence.
Both supporters and critics say Indiana’s 2024 “intellectual diversity” law is having its intended effect on college instruction. That’s where the agreement ends.
For supporters, including the law’s author, Sen. Spencer Deery, R-West Lafayette, "Senate Bill 202" is deterring professors from imposing liberal political views on vulnerable students. They say it’s bringing accountability to the classroom and starting to boost public faith in higher education. But critics, including many university faculty, contend the law chills free speech and infringes on academic freedom. They say its vague requirements are causing professors to avoid controversial topics, depriving students of exposure to robust debate on important issues.
College commencement ceremonies are ingrained in American tradition and provide a chance to emphasize the public good of higher education. But fears of violence or political disturbance have several colleges restructuring their ceremonies—or canceling the commencement speech entirely.
At least four colleges this spring witnessed what should have been a celebratory occasion—both for the institutions and their graduates—become emblematic of the divisiveness that often makes news about higher ed.
Kathleen Naranjo was almost eight years into paying off her portion of $50,000 in student loans when a federal appeals court last month ended one of the most affordable loan repayment plans in history. That Biden-era plan had reduced her monthly payments to $92 and she was working toward the day when the remaining balance would be forgiven after 10 years of payments doing public service as a nurse.
Now, a federal appeals court has officially ended the Saving on a Valuable Education plan. That means some seven million borrowers like Naranjo will face the likelihood of much higher payments at a time when they are struggling to manage other costs for gas, food, and healthcare.
When the U.S. Department of Justice demanded years of admissions data to identify possible racial discrimination at three top medical schools in late March, one official called the federal government’s latest efforts to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion in higher education “another day in paradise.”
But experts say those and other moves by the Trump administration to assert control over the nation’s medical education system could hurt the future of public health, research, and higher education.
