Social justice and volunteer service

The benefits of volunteer service have been documented for many years. Keira Wilson, formerly of Grinnell College and now at Johns Hopkins, captured five key career preparation outcomes that students can expect to acquire as a result of volunteering: mind-set of self-awareness, agility in solving problems, comfort with ambiguity, a collaborative approach, and active preparedness. While these outcomes are not exclusively related to volunteering, they reflect broader educational outcomes that many employers value.

Career preparation is important but may not be the driving interest for all students. The career versus making a difference motivation depends to a large degree on demographic and life experience differences. First generation students attend less-selective universities and graduate at lower rates, which may contribute to their being more highly motivated by social mobility and justice. Seeking purpose rather than financial gain is the key, which relates to the public versus private benefit of students pursuing a higher education. How then might institutions help students see the connection between social justice and the volunteer service that many pursue?

Forty-five colleges in California launched an engagement initiative for low-income students. Called "CaliforniansForAll College Corps," up to 6,500 students will receive $7,000 living allowance and a $3,000 education award for completing 450 hours to "serve the social and civic health of our state" and as a strategy to address the disproportionate impact of the pandemic in vulnerable communities.

Texas A&M in Qatar - arts and sciences proposal

A proposal to reorganize the arts and sciences programs offered by Texas A&M at its Qatar location stirred questions about faculty involvement in decision making as well as raised questions about the autonomy of the remote campus. Timothy Scott, interim provost in College Station, intervened by postponing changes and by forming a committee "to evaluate the potential impact of the reorganization proposal and recommend changes to the plan and timeline." In addition, the committee will explore "key performance indicators" that are included in the contract between Texas A&M and Qatar Foundation.

The Chronicle of Higher Education also covered the Texas A&M dispute. The greater detail of the Chronicle article included quotes from Francisco Marmolejo, President of Higher Education for Qatar Foundation, and noted U.S. experts in international higher education Philip Altbach and Jason Lane. However, the most salient insights were offered by Jana Kleibert, a researcher at the Leibniz Institute in Germany, who noted that branch programs and sponsoring entities in international higher education think they're on the same page but often are not. That Qatar Foundation asserted performance expectations in the contract negotiations with Texas A&M makes total sense and was a good way for Qatar to clarify what it expects in terms of outcomes. Reinforcing the legitimacy of Qatar's move to include new performance indicators in its contract with Texas A&M, Jason Lane suggested that international partnership models commonly evolve over time.

As the Texas A&M Qatar reorganization and accompanying changes moved to implementation, faculty in Qatar and College Station voiced continuing concerns. While the Qatar Dean's management style may have contributed to the controversy, the issue of faculty participation in decision making really demonstrates the broader problem - faculty understanding of what the Qatar program is about and how practices of U.S.A. institutions likely require modification in other country settings.

Having worked at Qatar Foundation and assisted in the very early phases of establishing the graduate programs of Hamad bin Khalifa University, everyone should have assumed from the beginning that expectations and contracts would change over time and that the partnerships should increasingly tip toward the funding entity's expectations. In what world does any entity say to its benefactor, "Take it or leave it. Our approach is so good that it cannot be adapted to local expectations or changing needs."

Learning pedagogy - balancing challenge and support

The idea of pedagogically balancing challenge and support in students' learning dates back to the early work of L. Lee Knefelkamp and other colleagues in the 1970s. The idea, and the research that supported it, was that students' responsiveness to learning differed based on developmental level and that modifying the balance to match readiness would result in improved student learning and development.

Assertions by faculty, one advocating improv as a model for increasing freedom and the other proposing music and its structure, beautifully demonstrate the merit of challenge and support in learning. Improvisation and the free expression associated with it, is often seen as very intimidating. In order to create an environment where students are able to deal with this freedom, focusing on students, using pretend to inform reality, supporting everyone, and assuming that all can be successful, serve as principles to enhance not only the improv experience but learning overall. In the music example, releasing the emotional dimensions of a subject and engaging learners with one another in structured interaction, offer additional principles that could deepen learning. Balancing these variables of support and challenge then offer a scale on which pedagogy can move back and forth to enrich learning and development opportunity.

Although these ideas were proposed separately, their combination brought back a simple, and extremely valuable, lesson in how to improve students' experiences both in and out of class. An integrative balance in educational experiences, focus on improving teaching, and integrating more experiential methods offer the most promising means of reimagining undergraduate learning. As experiential learning is enhanced, it's also important to strike a balance by not throwing out the best of other traditional pedagogies. A combination of commitments that faculty can freely make to help students learn to "solve problems, evaluate evidence, analyze arguments and generate hypotheses" will likely meet with the greatest success.

One of the distinguishing characteristics of higher education is the extra or cocurriculum, which offers enrichment outside of or in conjunction with classroom learning. In order to make these experiences more broadly available to all students, rather than those who have the privilege of time and money, institutions should create "for-credit learning experiences that incorporate elements that make extracurriculars educationally purposeful." Providing institution-wide internships opportunities that are not just add-on credits is another way to enhance students' learning experiences. Replacing the focus on selecting lucrative majors and having high grades with a focus on experience, including part-time jobs and internships, will help students develop real-life skills that will benefit them throughout life.

Attending to student engagement in general, while integrating learning experiences and balancing challenge and support, will not only improve learning but it will also help institutions improve their retention and graduation. The Power of Systems initiative is based on this assumption. Campus building design can also encourage student engagement. Combining these ideas with policy changes related to transfer credits, stopping in and out of full-time learning, can all do a great deal to bring students across the finish line of degree completion. But one of the impediments to progress in improving the quality of student learning is the disconnect between what faculty and administrations see as important. The recent American Council on Education's research recommended "elevating the importance of civic skills and global learning; more intentionally focusing curricula on developing student mind-sets, aptitudes and dispositions; establishing equity goals; and increasing transparency." Advancing these ideas will require deeper conversation among all educators, whether faculty or administration, in order to tackle the inertia of current discipline-based curricula on many campuses.

Germany prioritizing universities

New governmental leadership in Germany is pledging to increase funding for universities. With Germany already leading the EU is economic growth and influence and with a continuing commitment to welcoming immigrant populations, it is securing its future in the decades to come. Paraq Khanna in Move provides voluminous evidence that Germany is in a very good place to benefit from climate changes and population migrations that are underway and will continue. Coupling the commitment to "increase government spending on research and development to 3.5 percent of gross domestic product by 2025, and create a 'digital university' program covering teaching, qualifications, infrastructure and cybersecurity" is an alignment to watch.

COVID just won't go away

The aching reality that is emerging around the world is that COVID is not going away but, instead, continues to morph in ways the allows its spread in vulnerable as well as prepared communities. Spring breaks in 2022 may have contributed to a rise in the latest COVID variant, resulting in some campuses returning to mask mandates. The persistence of COVID and its variants in 2022 was addressed by new recommendations from the American College Health Association. The ACHA recommendations remained in place but variation in campus approaches increased as campuses moved into 2023.

The COVID pandemic has become an endemic and campus changes from the last two years will likely morph into long-term adjustments. With the shift to viewing COVID as an endemic to be managed, and changing policies related to its control, those with preconditions that potentially make them more vulnerable to the virus will become more at risk again. The good news is that American College Health Association's research demonstrated that higher education was more effective in implementing vaccination policies than the broader public. Going forward, perhaps higher education can continue to be a leader in mitigating the ongoing presence of COVID.

The impact of the initial waves of COVID (previously summarized) caused educators to ponder and respond to a "lost generation" of students whose experience is captured in a collection of essays by first-year students at Oregon State University. Part of addressing current students' needs involved masking and vaccination mandates, which turned into booster mandates but the "ripple effects" of the pandemic went far beyond what these measures will achieve. Faculty and their ability to respond to the pandemic received mixed reviews from students. Some educators have warned that a false narrative, which includes sweeping generalizations that don't reflect the reality of diverse enrollment, should be corrected if institutions are to navigate toward a positive future.

Multiple assessments documented the impact of the COVID pandemic. The disruption wrought by COVID resulted in many high school graduates being less well prepared. The National Survey of Student Engagement found that the impact of moves to virtual and other restrictions to students' engagement was more impactful for first-year students. However, NSSE findings indicated that students have been relatively satisfied with teaching and learning at their institutions during a very difficult time. Steps to take for the pandemic that has become endemic, tips from a counselor about fostering wellness during continued COVID uncertainty, as well as Inside Higher Education's "Back on Track" offered some help as institutions planned to support students struggling to stay afloat during this very difficulty time.

As the Omicron variant gained recognition, higher education institutions were warned to prepare for its inevitable arrival (or recognition) in the U.S.A. Some institutions responded to the spread of Delta and the emergence of Omicron by reinstating previous mandates, moving exams online, and cancelling campus events, while the majority of institutions resumed in-person instruction, utilizing other mitigation strategies instead. Cornell University reported 469 cases and cancelled mid-year graduation and moved finals online. Georgetown, NYU, and Princeton quickly followed Cornell's example, reflecting fears that the Omicron variant could quickly spread through in-person events. Striving to stay open during the Omicron scare led to innovation on the part of some institutions, resulting in their leading their communities to better testing and more effective mitigation.

While institutions switched back and forth in reinstating or dropping previous COVID control strategies, the question of how 2022 would look remained unclear. Institutions with rising COVID rates reinstated mask mandates in the Summer of 2022. This lack of clarity was perhaps behind Inside Higher Education's "Live Updates" which pulled their posts related to COVID management together in one place. As the winter surge of the Omicron variant declined and legal challenges to mask mandates undermined a consistent response, states began to roll back mask mandates and colleges followed their lead.

Unfortunately, politics sidetracked consistent response with Arizona institutions being a prime example - some responding with paused mandates and others maintaining their efforts to prevent COVID spread. Governor DeSantis declared that higher education institutions in Florida should refund 100% of tuition if they go virtual, an obvious assertion of a political view. The newly elected Republican Attorney General of Virginia issued an advisory that state institutions cannot impose vaccination mandates. University of Virginia President, Jim Ryan, responded by saying that the issue of vaccinations is moot because 99% of UVa's students are already vaccinated. Jason Miyares (the Virginia AG) isn't only seeking to restrict state institution's COVID strategies but also has dismissed two institution's legal counsels, because as his spokesperson says, "The attorney general wants the university counsel to return to giving legal advice based on law, and not the philosophy of a university."

The effects of the pandemic impacted niches within the student population in very different ways, with Black and Latino students and students with work and personal life complexities hit more heavily. Students aren't the only people who have been impacted by COVID. The higher education workforce contracted by 4% in fall 2020 and we don't know whether this portion of the workforce has now returned or has declined further. The distribution of decline was very different, depending on type of work, with part-time faculty, administrative, and student support staff suffering the most. Another way that faculty and staff have been impacted is in compensation. Michigan State University faculty recently protested loss of salary which has now been restored with a $1,500 bonus granted from excess revenue that resulted from more robust enrollment. Staff were not included in the bonuses, resulting in the trend of protecting faculty first and foremost.

Numerous lawsuits sought tuition and fee refunds for loss of educational benefit when institutions shifted to online and shut down, or limited access to, campus resources. The decisions vary significantly depending on the circumstances and the jurisdictions involved, with some cases dismissed and others resulting in millions of dollars of reimbursements.

Regardless of the challenges institutions faced, their presidents are confident and believe that adjustments have been made that will promise a positive future. Some question if this confidence is justifiable or warranted but the survey results are likely to have been influenced by the common expectation that leaders are the custodians of hope. Institutions will be best served if leaders can maintain hope while still facing the reality of adversity. Facing adversity is particular important in one of the findings of the presidents' survey - a shocking proportion of them (73%) indicated that race relations were either good or excellent.

Now two years and beyond the COVID pandemic, I'm left wondering what we knew or could have predicted about the devastation that the world has experienced. Unfortunately, higher education has not been seen by the public as helping to address COVID. The U.S.A. government has also wavered and lost credibility as a result of action or inaction. Critics charged Trump from the beginning with ignoring the pandemic plan assembled by the Obama administration (wouldn't you love to know what it recommended?). I've begun to think that no one could have predicted the impact of global inequities in health services, public skepticism about science and research around communicable diseases, or the fact that a virus could so effectively evade control by changing its very composition.

It's truly amazing that as COVID emerged in 2020 that the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) advised that the world's "lack of unity is a bigger threat than the virus." How prophetic of where we are now! And perhaps the battle against COVID should study and propose strategies that could begin to deal with this devastating and systemic contributor to the pain that has reached deeply into so many people's lives around the globe.