Students are not the only ones staging “walkouts” in the state of Oklahoma. All this week, school across the state of Oklahoma were forced to close their doors as many of their teachers staged a walkout and marched on the state capitol. The reason for the walkout is perplexing to some but for the teachers involved the message is clear: fair pay and proper funding.
The walkout comes just one week after the Governor signed a bill that would give teachers a wage increase of around 18%. This move seemed to make the problem worse however, as many teachers felt the move was just a temporary stop gap to keep the issue hidden.
Over 1,000 teachers have been part of this week’s flooding of the state capitol building and nearly 40,000 teachers have taken part in the state-wide walkout. They are saying that they are underpaid and their classrooms do not have the funding they need. There have been numerous reports of classrooms that do not have enough chairs for their students and teachers needing to work a second job just to keep food on their family’s table.
There is some sentiment that the teachers are grandstanding and the timing of the walkout is being questioned. Last week was spring break in most Oklahoma school districts and, with the walkout beginning Monday, many are saying that the teachers are just extending their vacations. One thing is for certain: getting the teachers back to work as soon as possible should be the priority of the state.
The University of Nottingham, an institution of higher education in Britain, recently devised and enacted a new university guideline: instructors cannot claim that they own lectures given in classrooms on campus.
Rather than the content creator owning the video, the University of Nottingham will have untethered rights to their lectures. On one hand, such recording equipment is the University of Nottingham’s. However, they certainly didn’t create the unique content that instructors are responsible for producing.
In Britain, university employees across the country are fed up with pensions, and are collectively demanding reform. Considering the fact that several other universities in Britain are gearing up to show prerecorded lectures to students while those teachers are on strike. Doesn’t that severely reduce, if not eliminate, the necessary worker’s right of the strike?
From the perspective of teacher rights, it doesn’t sound very fair that the University of Nottingham doesn’t allow teachers to own their works. This could render their protests ineffective, resulting in lower union influence, severely limited bargaining power, and other loss of liberties.
The University of Nottingham has formally asked instructors to provide the school with an “exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, and irrevocable license to all rights in the lecturer’s performance in a lecture.” Unfortunately for instructors, Nottingham staff have already made clear that instructors who create such works “may not be credited as the creator or author of the lecture,” and “[would not]… object to the way in which the lecture recording is edited, altered, or used by the university.
Betsy DeVos, the United States Secretary of Education, testified before e House of Representatives Appropriations subcommittee, in regards to the Department of Education’s 2019 fiscal year budget.
Before touching on what went on in the Tuesday midday meeting, it’s important to keep in mind DeVos’s interview on “60 Minutes” a few weeks ago. She seemingly could not answer the host’s, Lesley Stahl, questions about how well schools were doing in her home state of Michigan. DeVos drew quite a bit of criticism for her performance – or lack thereof.
Wisconsin Democrat Mark Pocan referenced the interview and asked if she had made any progress on meeting schools she had promised to meet. She hadn’t.
Betsy DeVos – the highest political power on education in the United States of America – told Mr. Pocan, “As Secretary [of Education], I have made a point of visiting schools.” DeVos then referenced her plans to visit the worst school in the nation. DeVos continued, “The question is, will they let me in?”
The question implies that she realizes how damning her interview was with CBS News not too long ago. However, simply knowing is far different than actually doing.
Ms. DeVos was also asked during the Tuesday meeting to describe general information about a commission she planned on making regarding school shootings. DeVos claimed it would feature four secretaries from the Cabinet – DeVos included – and would consult experts’ opinions on issues. She claimed that the group’s first meeting would take place in coming weeks.
People have a tendency to be more mean, impersonal, and cruel over the Internet because they can’t see others’ faces or figures, and vice-versa. Unfortunately, the World Wide Web has effectively spawned a new era of trolling, all because of anonymity provided by the system.
While the Internet is objectively great, the following application of its anonymity-promoting features surely isn’t.
Karin Stanford, a professor of Africana Studies and former Associate Dean at California State University Northridge, has publicly refused to teach students after claiming the university didn’t do its job in handling a serious online threat.
As a teacher of a class named American Political Institutions: A Black Perspective, she certainly ruffled a few proverbial feathers of her students. Ms. Stanford believes the threat in question came after asking the following question as part of the aforementioned course through its online component:
Donald Trump frequently made statements of an ___________ nature throughout this presidential campaign.
• A. anti-Mexican
• B. anti-Muslim
• C. anti-woman
• D. all of the above
The following sentiment, found in the form of a comment on the digital publication Campus Reform, stated the following:
This is government abuse. Somebody shoot her in the face.
According to Ms. Stanford, she allegedly quickly reported the post to the schools’ police force, though neither police nor her coworkers – not anyone at Cal State Northridge – has made her feel safe enough to return.
About two weeks ago, Bridgepoint Education, a for-profit educational institution operated in the United States of America, made publicly clear that it would legally combine the University of the Rockies and Ashford University, both of which are for-profit subsidiaries of Bridgepoint Education, into a… non… profit?
Such changes have been historically surrounded by controversy throughout their short history. Why is it controversial, or at least considered to be controversial, or inappropriate by some?
For-profit institutions of higher education are owned by a single person, a group, or an entity designed to make money. Under United States law, they’re subject to far stricter regulations than their nonprofit counterparts.
Nonprofit schools are typically subject to substantially looser regulations, resulting in more revenues, profits, and everything else financially advantageous a businessperson could think of.
According to Bridgepoint Education itself, here’s how the financing and other benefits of the deal will work out for both profits: Bridgepoint Education gets financially compensated for forking over Ashford. Further, Bridgepoint gets more cash revenue through “negotiated services,” which the parent company will give Ashford under a brand-spanking-new contract.
Although nothing is certain until experts can monitor the actions and behaviors of Bridgeport College’s conjunction of its two subsidiaries, it’s true that its owners could rake in countless individual benefits as business owners from initially owning the institutions of higher education.
Only time will tell the results of the transaction.
I’d imagine that if most people were tasked with using both college and Taco Bell in the same sentence, a common response would be something along the lines “during college, I used to go out drinking alcohol three nights a week, then go smash some Taco Bell.”
However – and it’s not to say like anybody is challenged to use both words in a sentence, or anything – Taco Bell will be associated with higher education in a more popular way from now on.
Get ready to work at Taco Bell!
All of Taco Bell’s 210,000-odd employees will be provided with a toolbox of financial assistance payments to help pay back their student loans, or even get rid of tuition before it rears its ugly head as interest-bearing loans.
Taco Bell is slated to help both past students that currently have outstanding loan debt as a result of attending college or trade school, as well as current employees that haven’t yet attended college, but aren’t comfortable with taking out loans for tuition, or financing the purchase of a class in college while being forced to enter one’s private information into the Federal Application For Free Student Aid – gotta love the FAFSA.
The fast-food company is also kind enough to offer eligible employees the help of tutors through Guild’s academic and financial aid coaches, as well as the power of college advisers that are tailored precisely to the students that work for Taco Bell, based on personality profiles taken through the company’s help.
Businesses are all over the United States. Without them, we likely wouldn’t have the wonder of supermarkets, cheap clothing available all over, or many other things we take for granted on a daily basis.
Nonprofit businesses are not quite as common, but still considerably popular. Schools are typically one of them, including the University of Nevada at Las Vegas.
Universities like the University of Nevada at Las Vegas rely on donations from alumni, community members, and anonymous sources that are often too proud to reveal their faces. Such a mystery has reared its head again, this time at UNLV itself.
The most recent President of UNLV is named Len Jessup, who was ousted from his seat after he was given bad reviews from the school’s chancellor. Further worsening his standing at the university, Mr. Jessup failed to get along with several unnamed regents, an academic term for any school’s directors.
So What’s The Big Deal?
An anonymous donor provided UNLV with a $14 million donation intended to fund the construction of the school’s new medical education facility. Just nine days – slightly more than one week – after Jessup received a negative review from the school’s chancellor, Mr. Jessup signed an agreement with a clause that stated if UNLV’s President or Medical Dean left before 2022 – either one – the $14 million gift effectively went “bye-bye.”
As of today, the University of Nevada at Las Vegas still doesn’t have that gift back, and doesn’t have a means of funding the medical school.
In the overlap between education and government, a term coined “educational access” exists. Educational access was part of a 1965 bill, a Higher Education Act – or HEA – bill. The idea’s original central goal was to create infrastructure – not roads, water pipes, or traffic lights; rather, a means for students to be equally exposed to all things other students are – to connect students of all ages with the tip of the top in education, as well as the bottom of the barrel.
Discussions that took place last week at the Duke in DC office – as its name implies, it’s located in the nation’s capital – deeply involved the ability of the Higher Education Act to provide better access to all college-eligible persons.
So, what did the discussions culminate in? Nothing much, really.
Panelists agreed that access to universities and colleges hinged more on definitions of various things related to inequality in education than on what many think the central problem is – inabilities to reach agreement on educational and social programs and funding to fire them up.
Last week’s panel included experts such as Deondra Rose, a Washington D.C. native that is currently an Assistant Professor at Sanford School. Mr. Rose also penned a book about the HEA’s history, and its effects on molding society as whole and individuals, as well.
Discussing and convening on what defines equal access is considerably more difficult today than in the past, as such a wide variety of educational possibilities exist today.
The University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point announced their plans to save money by cutting 13 majors in the social sciences and the humanities. The university has seen declining enrollment, and the university plans to add what they call majors with “clear career pathways” to help create interest in the university.
The university will expand programs in finance, marketing and engineering while cutting majors in programs that include art, English, history, foreign languages, political science and philosophy. The university will also expand its MBA programs.
While the university states that this dropping of humanities and social science majors is designed to save money and attract enrollment, critics say that it is all part of a conservative agenda to deemphasize liberal arts in favor of an educational system that prepares people for the workforce. Critics point to a program pushed by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in 2015. He specifically stated that he wanted the university system to “meet the state’s workforce needs.” Critics say that conservatives do not see any practical value in studying the liberal arts, so they seek to eliminate them.
Students and faculty members at the University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point react in shock at the announcement. A group of concerned students have planned a sit-in in a campus administration building to protest the planned drop in majors.
While the university does plan to drop 13 majors, those currently enrolled in one of the 13 majors do not have to be concerned. The school stated that those who are enrolled will be able to graduate in their majors.
The millennial group is thought to be the generation that is the best educated in all of American history. Its now estimated that more than one-third of millennials who are between the ages of 25 and 34 have completed college. One interesting and important point, however, is that the number of college-educated millennials can vary substantially depending on location.
A study done by the Brookings Institution tried to find out which cities had the most educated millennial demographic. The Brookings Institution found that 12 cities in the country had a rate of about 45% of young people who were college educated. Another find of the Brookings study was that the majority of the cities in the USA were found to have millennial college education rates typically between 30% and 45%. Some cities have a rate that is even below average when it comes to millennial college education. San Antonio, Texas and Fresno California had less than a third of its millennial population without college degrees.
Despite millennials now being the most educated generation in our history, some trends show that this may not last for long. College enrollment actually declined between 2012 and 2016. Only in 2017 did enrollment increase but slightly. All of this is despite the fact that more high school students are completing schooling than ever. Meanwhile, some of the cities where you will find the most educated millennial workforce includes Raleigh, North Carolina, Madison, Wisconsin, Hartford Connecticut and San Jose, California. All of these cities have close to or over 50% of its millennial population with college degrees.