What happened

The University of Oklahoma has removed a graduate student after she gave a student a failing grade on a psychology paper that cited the Bible as proof that “belief in multiple genders” is “demonic.” A review determined that the instructor, Mel Cuth, was “arbitrary in the grading of this specific paper,” the university said Monday, and she “will no longer have instructional duties.”

Who said what

The junior psychology major who wrote the essay appealed her zero grade and filed a religious discrimination claim. “Her case became a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over academic freedom on college campuses” after the university suspended Cuth and struck the student’s failing grade, The Associated Press said. Conservative groups and commentators made it an “online cause, highlighting” the junior’s argument “she’d been punished for expressing conservative Christian views.”

The University of Oklahoma’s Graduate Student Senate called Cuth’s removal “reprehensible.” The failed essay, meant to discuss academic research on gender expression and bullying in middle school, included a “prayer” that America’s youth “would not believe the lies being spread from Satan” about multiple genders. Cuth responded that the paper “does not answer the questions for the assignment,” relies on “personal ideology” and “is at times offensive,” though “I am not deducting points because you have certain beliefs,” according to a screenshot posted online by the school’s Turning Point USA chapter.

What next?

Cuth said through a lawyer yesterday she was “considering all of her legal remedies, including appealing this decision.”

‘A lesson in false limits’

Sally Jenkins at The Atlantic

Few “professionals suffer more from ageism than athletes,” says Sally Jenkins. Fans “want athletes to retire before they lose the luster of their prime and start looking knee sore,” an “expectation that, judging by the recent exploits of the skier Lindsey Vonn and the quarterback Philip Rivers, has cheated audiences.” Too many “athletes, however, are discouraged from competing as they age.” Vonn and Rivers “both saw an opening to compete again, and something adventurous in them said, ‘Why not?’”

Read more

‘This Christmas, let’s ban the world’s most miserable gift-giving game’

Dave Schilling at The Guardian

It is “forced frivolity season,” and people can “say yes to just about every holiday party invite — save for one massive exception. White elephant parties,” says Dave Schilling. There isn’t a “more dispiriting feeling than unwrapping a hardcover edition of a book you’ve been meaning to read or a pair of Bluetooth headphones and having it ripped from your hands.” The “person who invented this cursed activity takes more pleasure in witnessing pain than a dominatrix.”

Read more

‘Without railway reform, your town could be the next East Palestine’

Jess Conard at The Hill

“Three years ago, a 149-car train pulled by three locomotives carrying tons of toxic chemicals derailed in East Palestine, Ohio,” and the “scars — physical, emotional and economic — remain today,” says Jess Conard. The “safety protocols that exist are ineffective,” yet the “standards that would make railroads operate safely are ignored.” These “safety technologies are reasonable and available and could have prevented the disaster in East Palestine.” If “implemented quickly, they could also prevent a disaster in your community.”

Read more

‘More math, not less, will lead students to success’

Bloomberg editorial board

Educators have “embraced trendy curricula that seek to make math more fun, incorporating coursework that feels more relevant to students than, say, dividing polynomials,” says the Bloomberg editorial board. These “approaches, though well-intentioned, tend to lower standards.” Not “only are core math concepts missing by design, but the rigorous statistics and computer science skills needed for more advanced coursework are also lacking.” Math “becomes fun when you practice, and to that end interventions must start early.”

Read more

The advantage of having a college degree while job hunting is “becoming a thing of the past,” said Jonnelle Marte in Bloomberg. Historically, recent college grads have snatched up jobs more quickly than peers with only a high school diploma. But the job-finding rate for college-educated workers ages 22 to 27 has dropped sharply over the past 20 months, and is now “roughly in line” with that of young high-school-educated workers, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. That concerning convergence is another sign of the dearth of entry-level opportunities for young, mostly white-collar workers. The overall unemployment rate overall for 20-to-24-year-olds hit 9.2% in September, “up 2.2 percentage points from a year prior.”

Given those vanishing job prospects, it’s no surprise that more Americans are saying college isn’t worth it, said Ben Kamisar in NBCNews.com. As recently as 2017, 49% of Americans felt that an advanced education improved their chances “to get a good job and earn more money,” compared with 47% who did not. Today, the sentiment has completely flipped, with 63% now disputing the value of a college degree. “Exploding tuition prices” are a huge factor, but the labor market is also making Americans sour on a traditional “ingredient of the American dream.” Artificial intelligence is making white-collar jobs feel riskier, while blue-collar work “is looking like a safer bet,” said Julie Jargon in The Wall Street Journal. Just ask Hannah Talley, 25, who dropped out of Texas A&M to become an auto mechanic and is now earning $53,000 a year at a Firestone shop. Meanwhile, her 22-year-old sister, Sophia, is struggling to find her way as a freelance journalist after graduating from the University of Texas.

“We can’t all be plumbers,” said Callum Borchers, also in The Wall Street Journal. There was a time after the pandemic when “skills-based hiring” that ignored credentials was in vogue. Employers at the time “didn’t have much choice” in a tight labor market. Now they “have their pick of available talent.” Faced with options, employers will increasingly “revert back to the degree as a proxy,” HR experts say, partly because it takes “more effort to determine whether someone without a degree can handle a job.” The value proposition of going to college “has stopped being a no-brainer,” said Allison Schrager in Bloomberg, but that doesn’t mean it “isn’t worth the expense for many people.” Having a degree is “a lifetime asset,” and “the average college graduate can still expect to earn $1 million more over their lifetime” than those with high school diplomas. That’s enough to give college at least a passing grade.

‘Teachers want to help English learners. We owe them the right tools.’

Javaid Siddiqi at The Hill

English learner students are “capable of making multi-year academic gains in a single school year and represent some of the most motivated learners,” says Javaid Siddiqi. The “question isn’t whether they can succeed. It’s whether we’re equipping their teachers with the tools to help them.” Every “teacher should understand strategies to help students deconstruct texts. You can’t teach students who can’t access the reading.” The “problem is that most educator preparation programs don’t teach these strategies.”

Read more

‘Is Queens the new political bellwether of America?’

Michael Massing at The Guardian

As the “extraordinary Oval Office meeting” between President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani shows, “there’s a new bellwether in American politics,” says Michael Massing. Queens “contains multitudes. With a population of 2.3 million, it would be the nation’s fifth-largest city if it stood alone.” It is “thoroughly middle and working class — a swath of heartland America set down in pulsating, cosmopolitan New York.” Yet “national news organizations have treated the borough like flyover country.”

Read more

‘Banning AI regulation will endanger American kids’

Michael Kleinman at Time

Despite “horrific incident after horrific incident, AI companies retain carte blanche to sell products with zero meaningful safety standards or oversight,” says Michael Kleinman. No “other industry is given such freedom to endanger people with total impunity.” A “broad range of states including Utah, Texas, and California have already stepped up with important AI regulation that would be eviscerated by preemption.” This “dramatically limits the ability of states to enact commonsense regulations to protect our children.”

Read more

‘The Nuzzi seizure of power’

Chris Lehmann at The Nation

Future “chronicles of the utter debasement of American political journalism will have to devote an entire chapter” to oral sex, says Chris Lehmann. This “salacious discourse comes off as positively quaint next to the revelations recounted by Beltway journalist Ryan Lizza in his serial Substack breakdown of the demise of his relationship with Olivia Nuzzi.” What “becomes clear across the dreary narrations” is “that all parties are in thrall to the act of portentous narration itself.”

Read more

As the Trump administration sets its plans in motion to reallocate the responsibilities of the Education Department, the initial steps are illuminating how President Donald Trump could fulfill his campaign pledge to bulldoze the department entirely. Education Secretary Linda McMahon has launched a public campaign to argue that states and other federal agencies could better handle the department’s work.

How does the administration plan to break up the department?

American schools are funded mainly by state and local money. Still, the Education Department “serves as a conduit for billions of dollars of federal aid going to state and local education agencies,” said The Associated Press. Agency officials said the money will continue to be distributed as outlined by Congress, but under the newly signed agreements, much of it will come from a different agency.

The Department of Labor will take over some of the largest federal funding sources for schools and colleges, including Title I money for schools serving low-income communities. Adult education programs were already moved to Labor in June. Another agreement puts the Health and Human Services in charge of a grant program for parents attending college. The State Department will oversee foreign language programs, and the Interior will take on programs supporting Native American education.

Some of the department's roles remain unchanged, such as managing the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio. While student aid is unaffected, both McMahon and Trump have suggested a different federal department could better handle it. Pell Grants and federal loans will continue to be disbursed, and student loan borrowers will continue making payments. The Department of Education will also continue to oversee the accreditation process, which allows colleges to accept federal financial aid.

Money for providing educational support for students with disabilities will continue to come from the department as well. However, McMahon has suggested it could be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services. Investigations into schools and universities that have violated disability rights law and civil rights violations will also remain untouched, though McMahon has pointed out that the Department of Justice could take those over.

Is this the end of the Department of Education?​​

Not necessarily. McMahon has acknowledged that “only Congress can eliminate the department,” but she has “vowed to work to dismantle it from within,” said The Washington Post. The Trump administration is “taking bold action to break up the federal education bureaucracy and return education to the states,” McMahon said in a statement. “Cutting through layers of red tape in Washington is one essential piece of our final mission.”

Shifting the responsibilities of the department to other agencies “will not by itself remove red tape or alter the power that Washington exerts over states and school districts,” said the Post. States and school boards already control most decisions related to education, but the department “enforces rules embedded in federal programs, such as grant requirements.”

The proposed disbanding of the department has elicited pushback from education experts and politicians. It is “difficult to see how transferring cornerstone programs” out of the department will “result in streamlined operations, especially for the nation’s small, rural and low-capacity districts,” said David Schuler, executive director of AASA, the School Superintendents Association, in a statement.

The administration is acting as if the constitutional separation of powers is a “mere suggestion,” said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in a statement. This is an “outright illegal effort to continue dismantling the Department of Education.” Students and families will “suffer the consequences as key programs that help students learn to read or that strengthen ties between schools and families are spun off to agencies with little to no relevant expertise.”

Others praised the administration’s decision to move forward with its plans to try to shut down the department. The shutdown of the federal government “made one thing clear: Students and teachers can go to class without heavy-handed federal intervention,” said House Education and Workforce Chair Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) in a statement, per Politico. The administration is “making good on its promise to fix the nation’s broken system by right-sizing the Department of Education to improve student outcomes.”

While most Americans may think of being a school crossing guard as a relatively safe profession, it appears that this is not the reality. A new investigation has shed light on just how deadly being a crossing guard can be, with hundreds of people injured and even killed on the job over the past decade. Experts also say there are gaps in how these statistics are gathered, meaning crossing guard injuries may be underreported.

How dangerous is it to be a crossing guard?

The investigation was helmed by The Associated Press alongside Cox Media Group television stations across the country. It found that during the last 10 years at least “230 school crossing guards across 37 states and Washington, D.C., were struck by vehicles,” said the AP. Nearly three dozen of these crossing guards were killed. The AP compiled this data from “incident and accident reports requested from nearly 200 police departments,” but it still represents “only a portion of guards injured and killed nationwide.”

Often, the drivers involved in these incidents received very little punishment: More than “70% of drivers who hit crossing guards received just traffic tickets or no charges at all,” said WSB-TV Atlanta, one of the stations that worked on the investigation. And the drivers regularly didn’t stop: As many as 40 of the 230 accidents were hit-and-runs, and “in at least six of those, law enforcement was never able to identify the driver who fled the scene.”

There are problems when it comes to tracking this data, and a “full accounting is impossible,” said the AP. There are no federal agencies that keep a comprehensive list of crossing guard accidents, and “only two states have made a serious effort to track crossing guard safety: New Jersey and Massachusetts.” Crossing guard protection “remains a patchwork of state and local policies.”

What can be done about this?

Certain states are looking at solutions through legislation. Some hope that “improved technology could eliminate the need for crossing guards to direct traffic,” said WSOC-TV Charlotte, which also worked on the investigation. There are also efforts being made to “give towns and school districts more authority to make safety changes, like lowering speed limits.”

In “2025, there are alternatives to having somebody standing out there holding up a sign and waving it,” South Carolina State Rep. David Martin (R) said to WSOC-TV. School districts “should have resources and the power to be able to do that instead of going through the government.”

Other communities are working on implementing additional safety measures. To assist with a lack of crossing guards in the Seattle School District, officials are using “community help, flashing crosswalk signs and trying to reroute traffic away from schools,” said KIRO-7 Seattle, another investigative partner.

But this still hasn’t made the job of a crossing guard any less deadly. Crossing guards and school flaggers “were in the top fifth of deadliest jobs” in 2023, said the AP, citing the most recent year with available data. This death rate is “on par with power line installers and air transportation workers.” A crossing guard is also the “only occupation in that top fifth that interacts with children daily.”

‘College football may be the last remaining communal experience we have’

Daniel Diermeier at USA Today

College sports “undoubtedly unify a community, but they also do more: They reveal and forge character,” says Daniel Diermeier. And “excelling at sports or academics isn't an either/or choice” at schools like Vanderbilt. The university takes “pride in the fact that student-athletes live in the same residential colleges as their peers, where a roommate could be a concert pianist or a double major in economics and chemical engineering,” even as a “winning football program seemed beyond our reach.”

Read more

‘How white-collar workers could fuel a new populist movement — on the left’

Noreena Hertz at Politico

Fear that “AI will decimate the job market is growing fast among the educated middle class,” says Noreena Hertz. It is also “threatening to impact who they will vote for.” We can “expect to see the threat of being replaced by AI increasingly become a factor propelling voters toward a new cadre of populist politicians.” But “this time it will be white-collar workers driving the charge, and many will turn not to the right but to the left.”

Read more

‘Get cellphones out of schools’

The Boston Globe editorial board

The “prohibition of cellphones may be the most clear-cut school policy choice in the United States,” says The Boston Globe editorial board. It’s a “rare moment when data validates what many can already feel anecdotally.” With the “usual caveat that correlation is not causation, the trends are too stark to ignore,” and they “make a strong case for follow-through; schools with a cellphone ban on the books but no enforcement saw no difference in student attention.”

Read more

‘The pending disaster of a Skydance-Warners merger’

Ben Schwartz at The Nation

The “Trump administration immediately signaled its enthusiasm for a Skydance-WBD deal,” and “it’s not hard to see why,” says Ben Schwartz. But one “entity’s controlling that many movies, in theaters and on TV, television programming, news media and sports gives instant leverage to Skydance to raise prices for consumers.” It “would also continue wreaking harm to the basic canons of newsgathering.” The “merger would bode ill for Warner Bros.’ mainstay products — film and television.”

Read more

‘It needs to be said again: Leave Britney alone’

Kat Tenbarge at The New York Times

Britney Spears can “finally live on her own terms,” but an “online chorus of onlookers has howled about how she’s displayed that freedom on social media,” says Kat Tenbarge. This “time, it isn’t just the paparazzi following Ms. Spears’ every move,” as on social media “anyone can play the role of gossipmonger.” This “creates a cacophony that is difficult to ignore.” A “large audience’s benevolence” goes “only so far before it curdles into something far more sinister.”

Read more

‘The Lorax’s warning is clear. Will we speak for the trees and our wildlife?’

Jane Davenport at USA Today

President Donald Trump’s “administration is seeking to implement sweeping rollbacks to some of our country’s bedrock wildlife regulations,” and this “would degrade habitat on public lands, undermine decades of recovery efforts and accelerate the extinction crisis we face today,” says Jane Davenport. They “represent the modern-day ax at the base of our Truffula trees. And, unless we act, the ax will keep swinging.” This “unprecedented dismantling of our conservation framework would trade irreplaceable ecosystems for short-term profits.”

Read more

‘How can overworked and disengaged college students still get straight A’s?’

The Dallas Morning News editorial board

Walk “onto a college campus and you’ll hear the same refrain: Students are exhausted,” says The Dallas Morning News editorial board. Students “feel exhausted and anxious, yet they keep delivering on the traditional indicators of success — good grades and impressive résumés flush with clubs and extracurriculars.” They “might be spending less time on their academic work, or turning to tools like ChatGPT to help complete assignments, but their results are stronger than ever.”

Read more

‘The Springsteen movie shows the problem with today’s music biopics’

Carl Wilson at Slate

The “worst thing I can say about writer-director Scott Cooper’s new biopic about the making of ‘Nebraska’ is that I can’t imagine people bothering to love or to hate it that much,” says Carl Wilson. “Springsteen: Deliver Me From Nowhere” is a “worthy try at the nearly impossible task of depicting cinematically an artist making a deeply interior turn.” But its “only real courage is in that attempt, not in its own content or form.”

Read more

‘Dogs bred for herding sheep shouldn’t be stuck in the city. I would know — years ago, I tearfully gave one up.’

Rebecca Shaw at The Guardian

Dogs “bred for moving livestock across vast properties are now fetching a ball a few times while their owner plays Candy Crush,” says Rebecca Shaw. The “reason you want one of these dogs is because they are beautiful, amazing, intelligent creatures.” If “you are going to get one, you have to put in a lot of work to make sure they remain happy.” If “you can do that in your apartment or small backyard, that’s great, and impressive.”

Read more

‘Why millions are failing college math — and how to fix it’

Victoria Ballerini, Ann Edwards and Katherine L. Arrington at The Hill

College students are “walking into math classrooms worried about their future — perhaps with good reason,” say Victoria Ballerini, Ann Edwards and Katherine L. Arrington. Math has “functioned less as a bridge to opportunity than as a barrier to completion.” The “challenge is made all the more frustrating because they are unconvinced of math’s relevance.” For “many students, it is taught in ways that appear abstract and disconnected from real-world applications and divorced from their aspirations.”

Read more

‘Gutting special ed shows how little America thinks of its children’

K. Ward Cummings and Anne Tapp Jaksa at Newsweek

You “can tell a lot about a society by how it treats its most vulnerable members — like its children,” say K. Ward Cummings and Anne Tapp Jaksa. Indifference “seems to inspire President Donald Trump’s recent decision to gut the staff of the U.S. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.” Without “support, millions of children would be unable to access the academic opportunities that all American children are entitled to as citizens of this country.”

Read more

‘Trump should drop his damages claim against DOJ’ 

National Review editorial board

President Donald Trump is in the “odd position, by his own admission, of ‘suing myself.’ It’s a case he should drop,” says the National Review editorial board. It “comes to money. Which Trump doesn’t need, and which would be obscene to shell out in any nontrivial amount on the taxpayers’ dime.” The “genius of our constitutional system is how many abuses it limits by separating powers. But this is the sort of ethical conflict that cannot be eliminated by procedure.”

Read more

V levels will become the “only pathway” for young people aged 16-19 to gain vocational qualifications equivalent to an A level, the government announced yesterday.

The new level 3 qualifications “simplify” students’ decisions, and “streamline” the 900 existing vocational qualifications, allowing them to mix and match education options more easily.

They will sit alongside A levels, which have an “academic” focus, and T levels, suitable for those who are “confident about working in a certain occupational area”. V levels will offer those less sure of their career pathway more flexibility, the government’s “Post-16 education and skills” white paper said.

How would they work?

V levels will replace BTecs, which have been around since the mid-1980s. While A levels are geared towards university entrance, and a T level (a two-year course equivalent to three A levels) offers training for a specific career, V levels are designed for young people to keep their options open, said FE Week. They are tied to “rigorous and real-world job standards” and mix theoretical learning with developing practical skills.

As an example, after finishing their GCSEs, a student could study a V level in finance and accounting in conjunction with A levels in environmental science and geography. This student might then go on to an apprenticeship in the renewables sector.

Why are they needed?

V levels represent one of the first steps towards Keir Starmer’s target for two-thirds of young people to go to university, or pursue a “gold-standard apprenticeship” or equivalent qualification.

Last year “roughly one in seven” people aged between 16 and 24 were not in education, employment or training, said the Financial Times. Worryingly, the trend appears to be on the rise, with the 2024 figures representing a 1.5 percentage point increase on 2023.

Will they work?

“If you’re feeling a bit confused by it all, you’re not alone,” said HuffPost. “We’ve all heard of A levels” but they may have to “budge up” with the government’s addition of V levels. Aimed at reducing uncertainty over students’ futures, this flexible hybrid approach may inadvertently fail to direct them towards a clear end goal.

While the announcement is a “big step forwards” for level 3 education, it is “not everything we would want, of course”, said David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges. Though the plans are “ambitious and exciting”, the white paper highlights the “lack of support and funding” within post-16 education, which is plagued by “low pay in colleges” and an “absence of collaboration”.

“It is not yet clear when V levels will be introduced, how they will be rolled out, or which subjects will be on offer,” said the BBC. The government will now launch a consultation to “support the introduction of V levels”, said HuffPost.

‘AI is killing the magic’

Jemima Kelly at the Financial Times

“Will I ever again laugh quite so heartily at a comedian when I don’t know whether some of their jokes are artificially authored?” says Jemima Kelly. People are turning “increasingly to generative AI” to bypass “effortful activity.” But what “utilitarian tech bros like Sam Altman don’t seem to get is that creativity is not just about the final output; the act of being creative is itself in many ways the point.”

Read more

‘Gaza’s traumatized children urgently need the hope education offers’

Nada Hamdona at Al Jazeera

Education is the “only means of reviving hope and helping children start to overcome the trauma of two years of genocide,” says Nada Hamdona. It can “provide a sense of normalcy and purpose,” and “ought to be Gaza’s top priority.” While the recent truce “may have put a stop to the bombs, my students are still without paper and pens.” Learning will give Gaza’s “600,000 schoolchildren” back the “structure, self-assurance and hope for a brighter future” necessary for “psychological rehabilitation.”

Read more

‘The “anti-woke” tax that all Americans are paying’

Adam Serwer at The Atlantic

“Trumpist culture wars have made almost everything more expensive, effectively forcing all Americans to pay an anti-woke tax,” says Adam Serwer. Tariffs have not brought back any “manly jobs” and “making America whiter” is “driving food prices up and wages down, because the administration is terrorizing and deporting the immigrants who do most of the planting and picking of the American food supply.” U.S. “economic policy is now justified by a particularly silly form of right-wing identity politics.”

Read more

‘Politics makes for bad therapy’

Jonathan Alpert at The Wall Street Journal

“Instead of acting as neutral guides, too many therapists now act as transmitters of political polarization,” says Jonathan Alpert. “Therapists often pathologize politics, treating patients with particular viewpoints as abnormal or unhealthy.” They may “label progressives as stuck in ‘woke fantasies’” or “shame conservatives for ‘bigoted thinking.’” But by “validating partisan rigidity in clients,” therapists “function less as healers than as vectors of this new disorder.” Neutrality “isn’t etiquette — it’s the foundation of therapy.”

Read more

‘Is this how we should raise children?’

Louise Perry at The New York Times

Modern people “like to imagine ourselves as autonomous individuals, but in the natural human life cycle we spend a large proportion of our lives dependent on others,” says Louise Perry. “We often feel a longing for something like a village,” especially “college-educated, relatively affluent Americans who moved away from their extended families in pursuit of career opportunities.” Yet “even though forming communities” would “solve many economic and practical problems,” particularly in raising children, few people actually “make the attempt.”

Read more

‘America is sliding toward illiteracy’

Idrees Kahloon at The Atlantic

The “past decade may rank as one of the worst in the history of American education,” says Idrees Kahloon. The “decline began well before the pandemic, so Covid-era disruptions alone cannot explain it.” While “smartphones and social media probably account for some of the drop,” there is “another explanation: a pervasive refusal to hold children to high standards.” In short, “schools have demanded less and less from students — who have responded, predictably, by giving less and less.”

Read more

‘LA’s fires report exposes America’s broken alert system’

Kelly McKinney at the Los Angeles Times

The recently released “after-action report on the January wildfires” in Los Angeles “confirms what has become increasingly clear in recent years, as we witness failure after failure: We don’t know how to execute emergency alerting in this country,” says Kelly McKinney. “For all our technology, for all our wealth, Americans face a dangerous future with hundreds of cumbersome, inconsistent and dangerously slow state and local systems duct-taped together. Unless we face this head-on, more will needlessly die.”

Read more

‘Want higher birth rates? Get on board with remote work.’

Gleb Tsipursky at The Hill

If the “Trump administration and cultural conservatives want more babies, they should encourage more remote work,” says Gleb Tsipursky. “Working from home trims commutes, thus returning valuable hours to households. A parent can handle a pediatric visit without blowing up a shift schedule. Mom can breastfeed without logistical relays. Dad can cover school pickup without hiring a costly nanny.” Ultimately, “people want support that makes everyday life with kids workable.”

Read more

Many students are turning to technology that predates the rise of smartphones. It is a direct —and creative — reaction to the cellphone bans instituted by schools across the country.

The future is retro

Schools with so-called “bell-to-bell” phone bans have turned into looking glasses, peering into the recent past. Around the hallways and in the classrooms, old technology has been making a comeback. Gen Z and Gen Alpha’s “appreciation for flip phones, digital cameras and other gadgets of the recent past is well-documented,” said The New York Times. That fondness “seems to have taken on new urgency in response to a wave of smartphone restrictions in schools that has reached more than a dozen states.” As a result, you can find old iPods, Walkmans and Polaroid cameras in the hands of many an affected student.

The younger generation’s nostalgia for a time before smartphones is not new. “The breakneck speed of tech has led to a fondness for a quieter, more comfortable time,” said The Independent. This has especially been true since the Covid-19 pandemic. Post-Covid shutdowns, "cellphones seem to function as almost an extra limb for my students, an ever-present extension of both their body and mind,” Joel Snyder, a government and economics teacher in Los Angeles, said in a piece for Chalkbeat. This has led many to miss a “simpler time when their entire lives didn’t exist inside their phones, which, at that point, were just gadgets akin to a portable CD player or a Game Boy,” said The New York Times.

The nostalgia doesn’t stop at technology. One school with a cellphone ban also brought back non-Internet games and activities. “The ‘old-school things’ ballooned from puzzles and chess boards to a rotating craft of the month: a sewing machine, a laser engraver, a heat press, bedazzling materials and calligraphy pens,” said The Washington Post.

Log off

Schools that have instituted cellphone bans have seen a marked change in student behavior. “The most common things they say are that discipline problems are down,” Jonathan Haidt, the author of “The Anxious Generation,” said to the BBC. There is also “just a lot less fighting, a lot less drama,” and “truancy is down.” This is because “school is a lot more fun when you can actually talk with your friends and play with them and laugh with them.”

Many schools with the bans found that not having cellphones was generally well-received by both students and teachers. “You just saw a lot more people being outgoing and finding people to talk to when they might not have in the past,” Madeline Ward, a former student at Bethlehem High School in upstate New York, said to the Post. “Students deserve more,” said Snyder. “More space to be present in the classroom, more opportunity to engage with each other and more time away from screens.”

‘A tariff lesson for coffee drinkers’

The Wall Street Journal editorial board

Trump’s “tariffs are coursing through the American (and world) economy,” says The Wall Street Journal editorial board. Every “American coffee drinker either is paying more or soon will as a result.” The “U.S. has only a few regions suitable for growing coffee, and the amount they produce isn’t grande.” In the “case of coffee, tariffs don’t even protect a domestic constituency. They are a tax on American consumption pure and simple — a tax on MAGA’s forgotten man.”

Read more

‘Indonesia’s climate ambitions can’t shine in the dark’

Sisilia Nurmala Dewi at Al Jazeera

There's “no sugarcoating what many Indonesians feel about the recent violence: anger but also dread and fear,” says Sisilia Nurmala Dewi. The “climate movement, too, is drawing the line.” Both “reducing emissions and protecting natural resources are crucial to keeping the planet cool and protecting the people from even more devastating climate impacts.” But “instead of using these resources wisely for wealth redistribution and sustainable national development, our leaders have repeatedly been accessories to corruption and environmental plunder.”

Read more

‘As a young mom, I gave up alcohol. Why more Americans are joining me.’

Ericka Andersen at USA Today

Eliminating “alcohol fits in perfectly with a wave of public research on and interest in reducing toxins in food, products and technology,” says Ericka Andersen. If “you’re worried about toxins in the body, it’s almost laughable not to start with alcohol.” If “alcohol remains absent, we could see a generation with fewer cancers, drunken driving tragedies and less long-term organ damage — a glimpse of a healthier future.” People are “taking back control of their health.”

Read more

‘American students’ reading skills are in crisis’

The Dallas Morning News editorial board

The “reality is that students are doing worse in reading, if they are reading at all,” says The Dallas Morning News editorial board. These “losses could be attributed to any variety of factors: endless scrolling on social media, increases in screen time or the pandemic’s impact on learning. But whatever the causes, the consequences are clear.” Students are “graduating with dangerously weak reading skills, at a moment when communication and critical thinking have never been more essential.”

Read more

The care system for children in England doesn’t represent value for money, according to a new report, with a record number of those in residential care living in challenging conditions and often moved miles away from where they grew up.

The cost of children’s homes has doubled in the last five years but the current standards of care nowhere near reflect that. A report by the National Audit Office (NAO) has described the system as “dysfunctional”.

It’s another damning indictment of a sector that has been dogged by staff shortages and higher expenses, leaving vulnerable children unsupported.

The state of affairs

Protecting children in care has become a problem right across the country. “It is a moral failure” that thousands of children are abandoned at critical times in their lives, said a Commons Education Committee report in July, with “urgent action” required to “fix this broken system”.

On a local level, councils are struggling to find enough placements of a high standard for children. Many bounce from home to home, with no consistency or stability to speak of. A history of abuse and neglect affects two-thirds of children in care in England, said Sky News.

The challenges don’t stop there, with the problems they face continuing into adulthood. Due to “systemic failings” of the care system as a whole, those who emerge from care are “three times more likely not to be in education, training, or employment than their peers”.

Better information about the “supply and the availability” of places in care, but more importantly of specific “children’s needs”, should be the top priority for the Department for Education, said the lead author of the NAO report, Emma Willson.

Crunching the numbers

Like many concerns at the moment, a central obstacle for care providers is funding and allocating resources effectively. Care facilities do not come cheap but the situation is beginning to spiral out of control.

Overall, the total cost of residential care in England last year was £3.1 billion, rising from £1.6 billion 2019/20, said the Financial Times. The average cost to local authorities of placements in children’s homes rose by a third to nearly £320,000 in 2023/24, meaning an average cost of around £6,100 per child a week.

In the most extreme circumstances, children with complex needs require “24-hour supervision by multiple staff” and councils had been charged up to £3.3 million a year for a single placement, said The Guardian.

Profit-run sector

Companies that are privately owned, often funded by private equity, lie at the heart of the sector. They look to take advantage of the broken system, said The Guardian, with the fees they charge far surpassing the rate of inflation, with some of the biggest providers “enjoying average annual profit rates of 22.6% a year”.

Private firms were “racking up huge profits” due to market failure, and can load the children’s homes with “high levels of debt”, which often leads to “heightening the risk of market instability”.

Their presence in the sector has grown. Now, 84% of children’s homes are run for profit, said the BBC. Because they are independent, many private care providers can “cherry pick the children they take” from councils “based on how much support they need and how much profit this allows”.

Many schools across the U.S. have floated the idea of banning cellphones in classrooms, and these bans largely have bipartisan support. Currently, 35 states have some rules or policies regarding classroom phone use. By another metric, “bans on phones are being enacted or proposed in at least 40% of national education systems, with the aim of helping students focus,” said The Economist. Despite this, not everyone agrees that completely banning cellphone use is a good idea, and some believe it can cause different types of harm.

Pro: Reduces distractions

Banning cellphone use in class can lead to more focused students. “The human brain is incapable of thinking more than one thing at a time,” said Michael Rich, an associate professor of pediatrics and an associate professor of social and behavioral sciences at Harvard University, to the Harvard Gazette. Cellphone usage in class can lead to distractions for all students, not just the one using the phone. “Students’ phones can make notification noises that disrupt class and embarrass the students,” said the East Hampton Star.

Removing cellphones “created an environment more conducive to learning” and led to “less student chatter and disruptive behavior,” said The Economist. One study also found that in classrooms without cellphones, “even teachers used their own phones less” and “they also became more engaged with pupils.”

Con: Reduces some learning opportunities

Technology is integral to today’s society. “Students need to learn the risks and opportunities that come with technology, develop critical skills and understand to live with and without technology,” said a 2023 report by UNESCO. “Shielding students from new and innovative technology can put them at a disadvantage.”

Students need to be taught “how to use cellphones and when to use them responsibly,” said Candice Breaux, the career and technical education supervisor at West Baton Rouge Parish Schools, to Education Week. “How do they know when it’s appropriate, where it’s appropriate, how it’s appropriate to use them?”

Pro: Can reduce the risk of mental health struggles

A lack of cellphones could make many students feel more comfortable. One school in Texas that implemented a ban “reported more participation by students and also said they saw student anxiety plummet — mainly because students weren’t afraid of being filmed at any moment and embarrassing themselves,” said NPR. This also reduces cyberbullying.

Constant access to social media has led young people to become more depressed. “School hours could provide a large chunk of the day that they get a break from screens, which might have a positive impact on mental health,” said Care.com.

Con: Challenging to implement

Enforcing cellphone policies “adds one more task to a teacher’s long to-do list,” said Care.com. It may become more burdensome to enforce a total ban than just to teach students to use phones responsibly. “Teachers could spend a lot of energy and effort fighting [cellphones], but I don’t know how far they really would get,” Lauren Tavarez, director of digital learning at the Ector County Independent School District in Texas, said to Education Week.

In addition, even if a ban is implemented, “there are still tablets and laptops — intended as aids to classroom instruction but offering many of the same temptations to distraction,” said The Economist.

Pro: Improves grades and learning

Removing cellphones reduces cheating. No cellphone access forces students to learn the material. “With virtually everything at their fingertips on an Internet-connected phone, students can not only look up answers but also use AI chatbots to generate text, thus evading in-class writing assignments,” said Britannica. Without phone access, students pay attention and absorb the material.

“For low-achieving students, even modest differences can really matter,” Louis–Philippe Beland, an economist at Carleton University in Ontario, said to The Economist. A study performed in India found that students in phone-free classrooms performed better academically, especially in non-STEM classes.

Con: Reduces sense of safety

Banning cellphones limits students’ abilities to contact their loved ones in case of an emergency. The most common reason given by parents to keep school phone access was to be “able to get in touch if there’s an emergency,” said NBC News. This is especially pertinent with the rise of gun violence in schools.

“It is a very sad state of affairs that one of the reasons we think we have to have phones in the classroom is so when the shooting starts, students can call and say goodbye or let people know that this is happening,” Robin Gurwitch, a psychologist at Duke University, said to NBC News.

‘America’s 9/11 veterans deserve promised VA care. Congress must step up for us.’

Juwon Nichols at USA Today

Denied claims by the Department of Veterans Affairs “often weren’t errors,” says Juwon Nichols. They were of a “deeply troubling mindset in which VA employees looked out for themselves first.” The “prevailing mindset was to follow procedure, not advocate for the veteran, leaving him mired in red tape with no clear path to care.” Congress “should pass the CHOICE for Veterans Act, giving veterans faster access to the best care our medical system can provide.”

Read more

‘Colleges love this unfair admissions process. Eliminate it.’

Maya Prakash at The Washington Post

“College admissions in the United States have become divorced from merit,” says Maya Prakash. “I’m not referring to contentious arguments over legacy admissions, affirmative action or athletic recruitment. I’m talking about early decision.” This process “rests on the flawed and unfair assumption that a student’s early commitment makes them a stronger applicant.” Early decision “can be the right choice,” but “decisions should reflect a student’s qualifications, plain and simple — not their willingness to commit early.”

Read more

‘Say her name’

Andrew Day at The American Conservative

The “president should do more to highlight the murder” of Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian refugee in Charlotte, North Carolina, “discussing it in blunt terms to seize the political advantage, kick off an honest conversation about violent crime in America, and restore public safety,” says Andrew Day. A “sane criminal justice system would have seized the opportunity to keep” the suspect “off the streets, considering the great lengths to which he had gone over many years to demonstrate the extreme danger he posed to others.”

Read more

‘We need to eliminate the Freshman 15’

Mallary Tenore Tarpley at Time

The “Freshman 15 is a myth,” says Mallary Tenore Tarpley. Studies “show the average weight gain for first-year students is actually around two to three pounds. Far more concerning is the fact that the median age of onset for eating disorders in the United States coincides with the typical age of college enrollment.” We “hardly hear about this, though, because societal conversations tend to focus far more on obesity than on eating disorders.”

Read more

'Who can save France now?'

The Wall Street Journal editorial board

Can "anyone else save France? That's the $1.1 trillion question after another administration collapsed," says The Wall Street Journal editorial board. What "happens next is anyone's guess." Maybe President Emmanuel Macron "will try to soldier on, tapping some other hapless soul to manage an unmanageably divided legislature." Voters "risk finding themselves short of options, in part because they refuse to reward politicians who tell the truth about France's fiscal mess and economic malaise."

Read more

'Challenging narratives and reshaping action — protecting education under attack'

Maleiha Malik and Siraj Khan at Newsweek

This has been a "devastating year for many reasons — not least the impact of displacement due to war, starvation and domestic conflicts," say Maleiha Malik and Siraj Khan. Schools are "increasingly being turned into battlegrounds, or bombarded to rubble," and "every classroom that is destroyed or bombed tells a woeful human story: the confident arrogation by some of the destruction of the lives of others, with absolute impunity." This "simply cannot be. Accountability must take place."

Read more

'Memo to the CEO: office romance is also the board's business'

Financial Times editorial board

The "problem of how, or even whether, to regulate a natural human instinct persists. The evidence suggests codes of conduct are not working," says the Financial Times editorial board. The "problems for companies and their boards arise when an imbalance of power leads to conflicts of interest." The "temptation to leave consensual office romances alone is still strong," but CEOs "operate at a different level." The "boss should have to declare any close workplace relationships to the board."

Read more

'From Washington to Westminster, the populist right needs to erase history to succeed. It's up to us to resist.'

Kojo Koram at The Guardian

It "might seem absurd for a president juggling a global trade war caused by his avalanche of tariffs" to be "fretting over museum artifacts," says Kojo Koram. But "these attacks are not just distractions from the major issues; they provide the ideological justification for real material and legislative changes that will impact people's day-to-day lives." Trump can "use these conversations as the narrative doorway through which laws can be passed that erode rights for poor and vulnerable communities."

Read more

"It's a no-brainer," said John A. Torres in Florida Today. Banning phones in schools is "the right thing to do for our kids." Florida is one of 17 states, plus Washington, D.C., enacting all-day phone bans as students head back to school. With 68% of parents supporting some phone limits, 35 states now restrict phone usage in public schools. Some states are imposing "bell-to-bell" prohibitions on using phones for the entire day, while others bar them during class time, with students granted access between classes and during lunch. Research shows smartphone usage increases children's risk of mental health problems, "from depression to cyberbullying to an inability to focus and learn," said Mary Ellen Klas in Bloomberg. This is one of the "few things most American politicians seem to agree upon," with states as blue as California and as red as Kentucky passing bans. Over 90% of children have a phone by 14, and about half have one by 10. If you want kids to thrive, "lock up their phones."

Actually, most parents "want smarter rules," not total bans, said Keri Rodrigues in USA Today. All-day bans ignore the bigger picture. "In a country where mass shootings are too common," children need to be able to contact their parents in emergencies and parents need to be able to call kids. At shootings in Uvalde, Texas, and Parkland, Fla., "cellphones saved lives," helping students guide first responders to the shooters. Treating phones as pure distractions suggests they "don't have a legitimate and even essential role in students' lives." Technology is an inescapable part of modern life, and schools should be teaching students to "build healthy relationships" with it.

"Before the pearl clutching starts about emergencies, let's be clear," said Cameron Smith in The Tennessean: Most bans allow cellphone use in emergencies. The bans address an ongoing, daily crisis: An entire generation's brains "are quite literally being rewired by constant connectivity," resulting in "the erosion of focus, critical thinking, and the ability to engage deeply with material." But enforcing phone restrictions "will be about as easy as herding cats on roller skates," so parental support is "absolutely crucial." Smartphones are addictive, and have put adults and kids alike "onto attention treadmills." At home, Mom and Dad should also impose limits and model healthy cellphone behavior. We can't "applaud school board policies and then undermine their efforts the moment the bell rings for dismissal."

It's been over a decade since "Educating Yorkshire" first "melted the nation's hearts", as we watched English teacher Mr Burton help his stammering pupil, Musharaf Asghar, to "find his voice", said Helen Brown in The Telegraph.

Channel 4 has returned to Thornhill Community Academy where Mr Burton has been promoted to headteacher. "And, despite calls for our education system to be overhauled since Covid, high-school life seems largely unchanged since the cameras last trundled down the corridors."

Mr Burton is still "jovial and dedicated, if a little wearier", and the "sturdy" format of the show remains intact. Much like the first series, the "unheard and unseen" production team behind the camera "do a great job of coaxing moving insight" from individual pupils.

The revival is "perfectly timed", said Phil Harrison in The Guardian. Earlier this year, Netflix's "Adolescence" prompted a "national orgy of hand-wringing" about the state of education, with its portrayal of "overstretched" teachers as "little more than crowd control" for their maladjusted pupils.

It is comforting, then, that "plenty" has stayed the same at Thornhill since season one. We're introduced to Amy, a "thoroughly eccentric and entirely charming kid grappling with Tourette syndrome and the absurd (but, at 12, deadly serious) micropolitics of schoolyard friendships". And we get a snapshot of dilemmas faced by the "very clever and very disruptive" Riley, who keeps "clowning" in class.

Great care has been taken with the editing "to make these children hilarious, but never the butt of the joke; to show their vulnerability, but also their strength". Gradually a picture emerges of their "muddled impulses and motivations", and the factors that feed into their developing personalities. Many of the kids are supported with carefully tailored pastoral care. "Does it feel like a necessary blast of optimism? You bet it does."

The streamlining of footage into "simple, uplifting narratives" is part of the show's appeal, said Louis Chilton in The Independent. But its inability to "scrutinise the institution it depicts" is also what leaves it "ultimately superficial as a work of documentary filmmaking".

Still, there is something "heartening" about watching kids behave in much the same way they always have. Young people are often portrayed as "inscrutable beings, half-human, half-mobile phone – and yet, here, we can see they're just children being children".

The show isn't particularly inventive, said Emily Baker in The i Paper. However, when generational divisions are so "fraught", and "new moral panics" about the world our kids are growing up in crop up constantly, "this understated, quietly groundbreaking documentary is a tonic. Its message is clear and undeniable: the kids are all right."

President Trump wants to make American schoolchildren traumatized again, said Rex Huppke in USA Today. Seeking to whip the nation's youth into shape, he recently signed an executive order to reinstate the Presidential Fitness Test — an exercise in humiliation dreamed up "when emotionally torturing children was legal." A version of the test was first launched in the late 1950s by President Dwight Eisenhower, who was alarmed that our youngsters lagged Europeans in basic fitness. In the following decades, public school students ages 10 to 17 were, once or twice a year, required to run a mile and complete a sit-and-reach, a pull-up, and other exercises. For millions of us non-jocks, it was sheer torture. I recall weeping while staggering a mile in the Florida heat, and being made to "feel like week-old meatloaf." President Barack Obama sensibly scrapped the program in 2012, replacing it with a focus on encouraging lifelong healthy behavior. But Trump, of course, "wants to return America to imagined glory days" when "bullying was encouraged."

The test "changed my life"—for the better, said Steve Magness in Slate. I was too skinny for football and not coordinated enough for baseball, but while taking the test in second grade I discovered I was the fastest runner in my year. It "ignited a passion" that led me to become a high school running champ and later a coach. Sure, sit-ups and shuttle runs gave some kids' anxiety, but so does going to the whiteboard to solve a math problem, and "we don't get rid of math tests." The criticism just shows how liberals will malign anything Trump does, said Ingrid Jacques in USA Today. About 20% of American children are obese—up from 5% in the 1970s—and only 2 in 5 young adults are fit enough to serve in the military. That's a national security issue, and fighting America's flab "should be something we can all agree on."

I don't know if the test is a good or bad idea for kids, said Jill Twiss in The Daily Beast. But I can only laugh that it's being resurrected by a president who mainlines Big Macs and would struggle to do a single sit-up. Then there's the guy Trump has put in charge of the test, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He chugs raw milk, swims in sewage, and looks like a steroid-jacked Ken doll "left in the sun for approximately 938 years." What will their fitness benchmarks be? "Roadkill lifting? Social climbing?" Trump gave no details. But in the spirit of his administration, the challenge will surely permit cheating and require PE teachers "to accept bribes for higher scores."

Advancing your education through a graduate-level degree may seem like a no-brainer. But as it turns out, deciding whether or not grad school is worth your time and money can be a little more complicated.

Making the determination boils down to whether the "potential for improved employment prospects and higher long-term earnings outweigh the cost of obtaining a graduate degree, especially if you have to take on debt to pay for it," said The Wall Street Journal. The answer will vary from person to person, depending on factors like "what specific degree you are pursuing — and how much of a salary boost you can expect from it — and how much of a burden your total debt load would be."

Here are four essential questions to ask yourself in making your decision.

How much will it cost?

On average, "total tuition for some two-year, full-time graduate degrees can cost more than $100,000, and doctoral or professional programs often cost even more," said U.S. News & World Report. As a result, many students pursuing an advanced degree need to take out student loans.

If you can find ways to minimize costs, that may tip the scales in favor of grad school. For instance, you can look out for scholarship and grant opportunities, as well as programs that offer funding. Even selecting a program that is part-time or online can make a difference, as that might allow you to continue working while attending.

What impact will it have on your financial future?

The effects of grad school costs are not isolated to when you are attending — they can also have major implications for your financial future. This is especially true if you already have undergrad debt. When you are saddled with steep student loan payments, that can prevent you from progressing toward other financial goals, like buying a house or saving for retirement.

Instead of pushing the question of repayment down the road, make it part of your decision-making process. "It's not a 'Should I go to grad school' question. It's a 'Should I go to this grad school if I have to repay X dollars,'" said certified financial planner Ryan Frailich to the Journal.

Will it increase your earning potential?

Another crucial factor to consider is the effect an advanced degree will have on your future salary. If you would be earning significantly more after attending grad school than you would otherwise, that could help to offset the costs you assume.

Take the time to research "starting salaries for your program's graduates" as well as how much "people in the field ultimately earn," said Investopedia. Then, do the math to see whether you will come out ahead, or if borrowing costs will eat up the difference.

Could it broaden your career prospects?

Finances are not everything. When deciding on grad school, it is also important to evaluate "what kind of job you want and how that job relates to the degree you are considering," said Investopedia. Interrogate whether grad school is a necessary stepping stone on that path. For some fields, the answer will be yes. For others, you may be able to get there through work experience and networking, as opposed to earning an advanced degree.

The cost of graduate school can be prohibitive for prospective students without the help of loans. And soon, borrowers planning to take out federal student loans for graduate or professional school will face stricter limits on how much they can take out.

As part of the recently-passed Trump budget bill's student loan shifts, beginning July 1, 2026, graduate students can borrow only $20,500 per year, with a $100,000 lifetime limit. Meanwhile, professional students (think med school or law school) will have an annual cap of $50,000 and an overall borrowing limit of $200,000.

Of course, borrowing less is not inherently a bad thing — the less you borrow, the less you will have to repay later, plus interest. However, the new cap means some students "will fall short" on getting the funding they need, said The New York Times. Private student loans are technically an alternate option, but they have stricter eligibility criteria, fewer borrower protections and often steeper interest rates.

Here are some other ways to help cover the cost of grad school.

Focus your search on affordable programs

One easy way to lower your grad school tab is to find a more affordable program to attend. You might "consider enrolling in an online program or in-state public university," said Bankrate. If you do not have an in-state program you want to attend, check out the surrounding states' options as well. "Some states have agreements with neighboring states that allow out-of-state students to attend college at in-state rates," which can offer major savings.

Opting for a shorter program can also minimize costs — "for a master's degree, one-year programs cost half as much as two-year programs, and in the end, you still get the degree," said Investopedia.

Apply for scholarships, fellowships and grants

Scholarships, fellowships and grants are another way to help cover your costs — and, unlike student loans, this is money that you typically will not have to repay later.

Scholarships are "usually awarded based on merit or achievement." This is similar to fellowships, which are often "awarded to applicants with exemplary achievements," though they may also "require research in return for the reward," said NerdWallet.

Grants, on the other hand, are more likely to be based on a student's financial need. That said, there are also grants available for those "pursuing careers in designated high-need fields," such as teaching in an area in need of teachers or in a typically understaffed subject area.

Work while you are in school

While perhaps not the most appealing option, working even part-time while you attend grad school can go a long way toward cutting down costs. You might not even have to leave campus to do so; many programs have research and teaching assistantships, which "typically cover at least part of tuition and pay a periodic stipend in exchange for research or classroom instruction," said U.S. News & World Report.

Working off-campus can have its benefits, too. Some employers will help you pay for school while you work for them, an arrangement known as tuition assistance. The arrangement may be more common than you think — "47% of employers offer some kind of undergraduate or graduate tuition assistance," said NerdWallet, citing a 2020 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management.

The "MAGA takeover of higher education" is underway, said Chris Lehmann in The Nation. Columbia University agreed last week to pay $221 million to settle allegations from the Trump administration that it indulged "antisemitism in student protests against the Gaza war and in academic curricula." The school also agreed to a raft of Trump-imposed restraints, including a ban on diversity considerations in hiring and admissions, the reporting of expelled foreign students to the federal government, and a "resolution monitor" who will scrutinize Columbia for "the whiff of anything resembling affirmative action." The university's acting president, Claire Shipman, presented this "rushed capitulation" as a victory for academic independence that will let Columbia reclaim $400 million in frozen federal funding. In fact, all Shipman has achieved is creating a template for the shakedown of other schools: Harvard is now mulling a $500 million settlement to recover $2.6 billion in frozen funds.

"For all its flaws, the Columbia settlement is not nearly as bad as it could have been," said Stephen L. Carter in Bloomberg. The school did not have to admit any wrongdoing, the government relented on demands for information on students' immigration status, and the agreement does not give the government license to outright "dictate faculty hiring, university hiring, admission decisions, or the content of academic speech." Columbia could have easily avoided this punishment, said National Review in an editorial. Decades ago, it should have stopped the spread of antisemitism in its corridors and cracked down on a progressive ideology that tolerates the persecution of "disfavored minorities." That hatred became visible to many Americans only after the Oct. 7, 2023, massacres in Israel, when antisemitic protesters subjected Jewish students and faculty to venom and violence. The Trump administration has now forced Columbia back to "normalcy," and "other schools should follow in its footsteps."

"This deal won't end Columbia's torture," said Columbia economics professor Suresh Naidu in The New York Times. University leaders are fooling themselves if they think they can trust a capricious administration that rips up trade deals it negotiated with longtime U.S. allies such as Canada and Mexico. And the agreement won't placate the administration's "Project 2025 apparatchiks," who are explicitly out to transform U.S. higher education into a tool for ideological control. All it will take to shatter this deal is "a campus protest, an edgy syllabus, or even an acerbic student opinion piece." Then "new vistas of anti-Americanism on campus will be discovered, and the attacks will continue."

The 529 plan has long been a staple for college savings. These tax-advantaged accounts allow funds to grow tax-deferred, with tax-free withdrawals permitted for qualified education expenses. And now, they are about to have a little bit more flexibility.

As part of the budget reconciliation bill enacted in July, 529 plans can be "used to help pay for a broader range of post-high school credentials, like certification in specialties like auto mechanics or food safety, and related expenses," said The New York Times. The law has also "expanded what elementary and high school expenses can be paid for with a 529."

Expanded use of funds for credentialing programs

One of the most notable changes to 529 college savings plans under the Trump tax bill is that "families can now use 529 plans for credentialing programs such as welding, aviation mechanics and other trade certifications," said Saving for College, a financial education website. Tax-free withdrawals from 529 plans are permitted for a range of costs associated with these programs and others, including "tuition, miscellaneous fees, books, exam costs and supplies for programs," as well as "continuing education fees that may be required to keep a credential active," said Kiplinger.

While this shift certainly provides a big boost for those pursuing trades and vocational careers, it can also help those seeking professional licenses and certifications. Under the changes, 529 plan funds are also usable for costs like "CPA exam prep and fees, bar exam review and registration costs and licensing exams for fields like law, accounting and finance," said Saving for College.

For expenses to qualify, however, students must be in courses at "'recognized' credential programs, such as those on lists maintained by each state under a federal law passed in 2014, and those included in a special system maintained by the Department of Veterans Affairs," or in "programs approved by formal credentialing organizations," said the Times.

Higher withdrawal limits for K-12 expenses

The Trump tax bill doubles the amount that families can withdraw from 529 plans tax-free each year for K-12 expenses. Previously, up to $10,000 a year could be "withdrawn tax-free from a 529 fund to pay for kindergarten through Grade 12 tuition at private or public schools," said the Times. But "starting tax year 2026," withdrawals of "up to $20,000 annually" are allowed, said Kiplinger.

More qualified expenses for K-12 withdrawals

Alongside the increased withdrawal limit for K-12 expenses, the definition of what K-12 expenses are considered qualified is also expanding. While previously the use of tax-free withdrawals was "limited to tuition," now 529 plans can "cover an extensive range of additional K-12 costs," said Saving for College. "For instance, books and standardized test fees (like the SAT or ACT) are 'qualified expenses' under the new law for 529 plans, as are online learning materials, certain tutoring fees and dual enrollment fees for college courses taken in high school," said Kiplinger.

Fresh from embarrassing climbdowns on winter fuel payments and welfare reform, the government is bracing itself for another battle over plans to overhaul special needs education in England.

"If they thought taking money away from disabled adults was bad, watch what happens when they try the same with disabled kids," one Labour backbencher told The Times, summing up the mood in the party and among many parents.

What is special needs education?

Special educational needs and disabilities (Send) covers children and young people with physical, emotional and behavioural difficulties including dyslexia, autism, ADHD, communication and mobility issues.

Services are provided by councils, with roughly 630,000 of those with the highest needs supported by specialised education, health and care plans (EHCPs). Offering dedicated one-to-one assistance, specialist equipment, speech and language therapy, and even subsidised travel to and from school, these "provide some statutory certainty in a system that is overstretched and underfunded", said The Guardian.

Why does it need reforming?

There is widespread agreement among parents, councils and politicians that the current Send system is no longer fit for purpose. Complaints to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman have nearly tripled over the past five years, said Schools Week. Endemic assessment delays and funding and access issues are "symptomatic of a system that is in complete crisis", said Sharon Chappell, the assistant ombudsman.

Send support covers nearly two million young people, costing the Department for Education £10.7 billion a year, according to the National Audit Office. Critics point to a sharp rise in the number of young people diagnosed with ADHD and autism over the past decade, which has put an unsustainable strain on local education support services.

The strain on Send services has, counterintuitively, worked in favour of certain pupils who would ordinarily have been "barred" from mainstream education, but have instead been "folded into mainstream schools with success", said Cristina Odone in The Spectator.

What is the government proposing?

With a full reform package not expected to be made public until the autumn, "we don't yet have any firm details, and that is part of the problem", said The Guardian. Among MPs there is concern that talk of overhauling the system may, in reality, be just another cost-cutting exercise aimed at balancing the budget.

Ministers hope that by increasing the "number of places in Send units at mainstream schools", they can "eventually phase out the need for individual EHCPs over time" for all but "those with the most complex needs", said The i Paper. This has sounded alarm bells for parents and advocacy groups, who fear the withdrawal of vital support. Save Our Children’s Rights said "the idea that 'units' could somehow replace or supersede EHCPs and the rights they embody is worrying and wrong".

In an open letter to The Guardian signed by more than 100 special needs charities and campaigners, Save Our Children's Rights warned that without the statutory support provided by EHCPs, it is "extremely unlikely that ministers will achieve their aim of more children with Send thriving, or even surviving, in mainstream education".

And parents of children with Send "represent a not insignificant protest vote", said The Spectator. "The government angers them at its peril."

What happened

The Supreme Court Monday paved the way for President Donald Trump's administration to conduct mass layoffs across the Department of Education without approval from Congress. The decision lifts a May injunction blocking Trump's executive order aimed at carrying out his campaign promise of closing the department. All three liberal justices dissented.

Who said what

Trump celebrated the decision on his Truth Social platform, calling it a "major victory" for students and parents. The ruling "lifts the handcuffs off" the administration so it can "get education back to the states," Education Secretary Linda McMahon told Fox News. But Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a 19-page dissent that the court was expediting the administration's "intent to break the law" and that "the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave."

The DOE's staff of 4,000 has already been "greatly diminished" — by about half — since January, said The New York Times. Eliminating it entirely would require an act of Congress, and "most Americans want to preserve the department," The Wall Street Journal said, citing polling. Still, the ruling "continues a winning streak for the president's efforts to trim the federal government and assert his authority over the executive branch," said The Washington Post.

What next?

Legal challenges to the executive order will continue in lower courts, but some employees received notice of their termination almost immediately following the SCOTUS decision.

What happened

The University of Pennsylvania said Tuesday it will bar transgender students from its women's sports teams as part of a deal with the Trump administration. Penn also agreed to retroactively strip champion trans female swimmer Lia Thomas of her records and titles and to apologize to other swimmers "disadvantaged" by her participation on the women's team during the 2021-22 season.

Who said what

Tuesday's settlement is the latest development in President Donald Trump's "ongoing campaign to remake higher education" by using taxpayer dollars to punish universities for policies that have provoked his "ire," The Wall Street Journal said. Trump has "eagerly sought to reduce transgender people's participation in public life," The New York Times said, and Penn's agreement bows to the administration's "new interpretation" of Title IX, the law that bans sex discrimination in education.

Penn allowed Thomas to compete under Title IX and NCAA rules "as then interpreted," Penn President J. Larry Jameson said in a statement. But failing to resolve the new administration's transgender-focused Title IX investigation "could have had significant and lasting implications" for the university. The NCAA began restricting trans women athletes after Trump signed an executive order threatening to "rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities." By Tuesday night, Thomas' name had been removed from the school's online records for the 100, 200 and 500 freestyle, though a note underneath said she had set those records "competing under eligibility rules in effect at the time."

What next?

It was "not immediately clear" whether Penn's agreement would "prompt the Trump administration to restore $175 million in research funding that it suspended in March," the Times said, but it "appeared designed to limit the threat of additional repercussions for Penn."

'How HBCUs fight for survival in Trump's America'

Theodore R. Johnson at The Washington Post

HBCUs are in the "odd position of having solid and long-standing bipartisan support that still results in being under-resourced and vulnerable," says Theodore R. Johnson. Today's "excessively partisan politics around race and higher education further complicate matters." Even a "nonchalant White House, however, still creates tenuous conditions for the nearly 100 remaining HBCUs, even if they've stayed out of Trump's sights." HBCUs "understand acutely the importance of staying away from political controversy and maintaining bipartisan support."

Read more

'Gilead's HIV breakthrough'

The Wall Street Journal editorial board

HIV treatments have "come a long way over the last four decades thanks to U.S. pharmaceutical innovation that has built on government-funded research," says The Wall Street Journal editorial board. Gilead's "daily antiviral pills can prevent HIV transmission and slow AIDS." While an HIV vaccine "remains the Holy Grail, Gilead’s new long-lasting injection, lenacapavir, is the next best thing." Even "Big Pharma's critics are hailing Gilead's breakthrough drug, though they forget that innovation doesn't come cheap."

Read more

'China's new push for Latin America'

Joseph Addington at The American Conservative

The "benefits of Chinese partnership with Latin American countries are significant," says Joseph Addington. An "increased Chinese influence and market integration reduces Latin America's reliance on the U.S., making the option particularly attractive for countries with an adversarial relationship to the U.S. like Nicaragua and Venezuela." For China, "expanding markets in Latin America fits naturally into its economic and geopolitical strategy." But China's "expansion in Latin America has not been without costs."

Read more

'How recent grads can get a job — even in a challenging labor market'

Michael B. Horn and Bob Moesta at Time

Graduating "college students are facing an uphill climb as they enter the job market," say Michael B. Horn and Bob Moesta. Although the "economic landscape is unique, it is not entirely different from difficult labor markets in the past." Workers are "also the customers of prospective jobs. That means college graduates should learn how to shop for employment." Don't "focus on the features of a job — the title, the pay, and so forth. Instead, focus on what you'll do."

Read more

Are international students still welcome in the U.S.? asked The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. It doesn't seem so, judging by the Trump administration's escalating "attack on foreign talent." President Trump signed an executive order last week barring foreigners from enrolling at Harvard University—where more than a quarter of students are from overseas—claiming they threaten national security. A federal judge quickly blocked the order, which was announced just days after Secretary of State Marco Rubio vowed to "aggressively" revoke visas issued to the roughly 277,000 Chinese students in the U.S. The administration justified that move by citing espionage concerns. But Vice President JD Vance gave the real game away when he declared that curbing visas for overseas students would help "American citizens to really flourish." This is "simply not true," said Sheldon H. Jacobson in The Hill. The 1.2 million foreign students in the U.S. haven't displaced our best and brightest—they pay full tuition, helping subsidize Americans who receive aid. And some 40% remain in the U.S. after graduation, "filling vital needs in health care, engineering, and science."

Trump's ongoing campaign against Harvard is "crude and vengeful," said David A. Bell in The New York Times. But the "internationalization of American schools is a real issue." While the number of foreign students in the U.S. is up 300% since 1980, many elite schools have not raised their enrollments significantly, despite the U.S. population growing by 50%. As a result, the admissions process has become more competitive "for homegrown applicants." Then there's the fact that the foreign students who attend our institutions "tend to come from considerable wealth and privilege; this is what allows them to pay the full U.S. tuitions." Those students make our universities "look even more elite and possibly out of touch"—providing fuel for Trump's populist assault on academia.

There is no upside to this "war on knowledge," said David Ignatius in The Washington Post. For decades, "the freedom and diversity of American higher education operated like a magnet," attracting the planet's most incredible minds and "spinning off trillions of dollars in wealth." But by ripping up the welcome mat and slashing tens of billions of dollars in funding for almost every area of science, Trump has created an opening for foreign universities to lure both international and U.S. talent. Drugs that would have saved American lives, and breakthrough technologies that would have created American jobs, will now be developed abroad. The destructive consequences of Trump's "Cultural Revolution" will haunt us "for a generation."

It's an open secret in academia that schools are losing to AI, said James D. Walsh in New York magazine. Most students in the country today are "relying on AI to ease their way through every facet of their education." ChatGPT takes their notes in class, summarizes textbooks, and writes their essays. Students have all but forgotten how to think on their own; one philosophy professor said she caught students "using AI to respond to the prompt 'Briefly introduce yourself and say what you are hoping to get out of this class.'" Many professors say they can usually tell when students use AI on their assignments, but the scale of cheating has put teachers "in a state of despair," questioning their educational purpose. Some professors are covinced "the humanities, and writing in particular, are quickly becoming an anachronistic art elective, like basket weaving."

The cheating is so rampant that honest students have to go to great lengths to prove their innocence, said Callie Holtermann in The New York Times. "The specter of AI misuse" looms to the point where students "described persistent anxiety about being accused of using AI on work" they had completed honestly. Some students have begun recording their screens to retain video evidence of their sincerity or using word processors that track their keystrokes. Their wariness seems warranted: Numerous studies have found that AI detection software used by schools routinely misidentifies work as AI-generated.

There's a simple answer to AI cheating, said John J. Goyette in The Wall Street Journal: Ban technology in schools. Eliminate online classes. Retire take-home exams and "administer in-class evaluations such as blue book essays, oral exams, and chalkboard demonstrations." Enforce a clear policy "that prohibits AI use" for writing papers "and imposes serious consequences." Reduce class sizes and restore Socratic conversation "to its position of prominence in the classroom."

Get real, said D. Graham Burnett in The New Yorker. The solution to cheating is not to pretend "that the most significant revolution in the world of thought in the past century isn't happening." At Princeton, where I teach, nearly every syllabus warns that the use of ChatGPT or other AI tools will be punishable by a visit to the academic deans. Students are scared to even visit an AI site for fear of the consequences. "This is, simply, madness. And it won't hold for long." My colleagues rightfully fret about the ability to detect if a student is cheating. But instead of fretting, we should consider this a gift. Since we "can no longer make students do the reading or the writing," we need to "give them work they want to do" and help them do it. AI might actually teach the teachers how to educate again.

'A Canadian defense buildup could restart a beautiful friendship'

Greg Pollock and Imran Bayoumi at The Washington Post

The U.S. and Canada have "enjoyed a close security partnership and a shared perception of how to defend against the primary threats facing North America," but this is "no longer the case," say Greg Pollock and Imran Bayoumi. President Donald Trump "must realize that Canada's defense investment decisions may not always align with his priorities." If Canada's prime minister "can put Canada on a credible path to meeting its defense commitments, the bilateral relationship could be headed toward a much more stable footing."

Read more

'We desegregated schools 71 years ago. We still have more work to do.'

Russ Wigginton at USA Today

It has been "71 years since the Brown v. Board of Education decision," and "our country is reminded of how far we've come, and how much work remains, through the lens of education," says Russ Wigginton. The Department of Justice's "recent removal of 1960s-era safeguards" could "threaten the spirit of that landmark ruling." One of the "greatest challenges is an attack on the very foundation of education via the ongoing threats to free thought and critical inquiry."

Read more

'Trump's tariffs are a lobbyist's dream'

Christian Schneider at the National Review

Donald Trump "seems to view the free market as a game board on which he controls the pieces," says Christian Schneider. His "dizzying tariff announcements throttle innovation and product development, injecting uncertainty into a functioning market." Firms "must petition Washington for exemptions, unleashing a lobbying bonanza that lets the White House dispense carve‑outs to political friends." Business plans "die in limbo because managers don't know whether the next presidential tweet will turn their imported component into contraband."

Read more

'The misinformation campaign trying to bring down abortion pills'

Rachel Jones and Jamila Perritt at The Nation

Medication "abortion is safe, effective, and widely accepted by patients and providers, which makes it a prime target for political attacks founded on misinformation," say Rachel Jones and Jamila Perritt. Promoting "shoddy science is not a new tactic of the antiabortion movement." If "legislators and administrative officials got their way, then hundreds of thousands of people across the country could lose access to mifepristone," denying them "access to a safe, effective and well-studied method."

Read more

As the Trump administration broadens its crackdown on international students, those students and their families are looking abroad to complete their education. The world's young scholars are seeking alternatives to U.S. colleges and universities.

Foreign students are "in chaos" as the White House threatens their American education, said The Hill. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in late May that the administration had paused new student visas, would "aggressively revoke visas" for Chinese students, and suggested the U.S. could cap international student admissions at all American colleges at 15% of total enrollment. The administration believes foreign students study in America for "political purposes, not educational or scientific ones," said Jay Greene, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

The 'world's gain'?

The world's "star students" are now looking instead to universities in Asia and Europe, said NBC News. There are "plenty of foreign governments and universities" eager to cultivate the talents of young people who have long come to America and "helped make the United States a global tech and scientific leader." One likely winner will be China. The country is set to become "significantly more attractive than before to students and researchers from the Global South," said Simon Marginson, a professor of higher education at the University of Oxford.

"Every ambitious Chinese parent" has longed to send their child to Harvard University, said Alex Lo at The South China Morning Post. Now they are having second thoughts. "What's the point of investing millions in your child's education" if they can suddenly be deported because of a presidential whim? That will be America's loss, but it will be the "world's gain, and not the least China's." Chinese students are likely to stay home rather than trying out their luck in an "increasingly hostile, not to say racist, America."

The U.S. is "not going to lose its appeal overnight," said Karishma Vaswani at Bloomberg. It will remain a "coveted" place for many foreign students to study because of the "potential to find lucrative employment after graduation." But Canada and the U.K. are already "poised to scoop up disillusioned applicants." So are Australia and New Zealand. Hong Kong, Tokyo and Malaysia additionally stand to benefit, as Trump makes the U.S. a "far less inviting option" for students who want to "study, grow and build their future."

'Shooting itself in the foot'

The losses will be felt not just on U.S. campuses but in "local and state economies, as well," said The Washington Post. During the 2023-24 school year, roughly 1.1 million foreign students contributed $44 billion to the American economy. Those students "pay rent, they go to restaurants, they travel," said Nicholas Barr, a professor at the London School of Economics. America is "shooting itself in the foot big time."

America is "putting its economic engine at risk," said David L. Di Maria, the vice provost for global engagement at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, at The Conversation. The irony is that Trump's crackdown will "hamper" his administration's "America First" goals for the "economy, science and technology, and national security." Pushing away foreign students who study science and engineering will "ultimately redirect talent to other countries, allies and adversaries alike."

With the school year coming to an end at American universities across the country, colleges are taking a step to avoid the ire of the Trump administration: canceling affinity graduations. These events are optional ceremonies meant to highlight the diversity of student bodies, but some universities are rethinking their plans to host them as the White House promotes an anti-DEI platform at colleges.

Despite this, many students on these campuses are fighting back against the administration's anti-DEI push. Harvard University has been in the spotlight the most, but other schools have also seen similar actions from students.

A widespread backtrack

The U.S. Department of Education began working to eliminate diversity programs after President Donald Trump signed an executive order calling DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion efforts) "radical and wasteful." Following this, a slew of universities decided to backtrack on hosting affinity graduations. Harvard has been the most notable college to do so, and will "no longer provide funding, staffing or spaces for end-of-year affinity celebrations," the university said in a statement.

This marks a notable change for the Ivy League institution, as Harvard previously "hosted ten affinity celebrations for the Class of 2024, including for Arab, Black, Indigenous, Latinx, first-generation, low-income and Asian American, Pacific Islander and Desi graduates," said The Harvard Crimson. But Harvard is just one "among several universities across the country that have canceled affinity graduations," said CNN. The University of Kentucky, the University of Louisville, the University of Notre Dame, Wichita State University and others have all canceled various affinity events.

Students left scrambling

Even with the White House's actions resulting in some affinity graduation cancellations, students at these schools are "scrambling to find ways to still host the events," said CNN. This includes many students and student-led groups that are creating their own diversity ceremonies.

At Harvard, members of the Harvard Black Alumni Society "raised $46,000 for this year's event after the university announced April 28 that it would no longer fund the ceremonies," said NBC News. Another canceled ceremony had been designed to highlight Harvard's LGBTQ+ students, so a "small group of students organized an independent event" instead. Harvard's Asian American Alumni Alliance was also able to host an "unforgettable affinity celebration honoring the Class of 2025" with 500 guests, the alliance said on Facebook.

At Ohio University, one student "arranged for his alma mater's Black alumni weekend to go forward this spring after the university canceled it," said The Associated Press. And other schools are pushing back against Trump by not stopping their events. This includes California State University, Long Beach, whose affinity graduations were "held as planned this semester," said the Long Beach Current. This included graduation ceremonies held for American Indian students, Cambodian students, Latino students, Pacific Islander students and others, according to the university's website.

As a result, some say affinity graduations are likely to continue in some form. The White House is "forcing students and faculty to think creatively beyond the university and work around it," said Antar Tichavakunda, a professor of race and higher education at the University of California, Santa Barbara, to CNN. "I don't think this will be the end of culturally specific graduations. I just think it might be the end of universities supporting them."

Donald Trump has revoked Harvard University's ability to enrol international students, who currently make up over a quarter of its intake.

In a dramatic twist of his "escalating battle" with the Ivy League institution, the Trump administration has also said that thousands of current students must transfer to other universities or leave the country, said The Associated Press.

What did the commentators say?

"How can the federal government dictate which students a private university can and cannot enrol?" said The New York Times. In reality, the US government has "enormous power" over who is allowed to enter the country to study.

Colleges and universities use a "vast" database, known as SEVIS, or the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, to "manage and track" the enrolment of international students. But this database is operated by the Department of Homeland Security; Trump is exploiting this "vulnerability" by revoking Harvard's access to it, effectively banning overseas students.

The DHS claimed that Harvard has allowed "anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators" to assault Jewish students on campus. Department officials also alleged that Harvard has collaborated with the Chinese Communist Party, hosting and training members of a Chinese paramilitary group as recently as last year.

This turn of events "drastically escalates" the dispute between the White House and the university, said CNN. Trump had frozen more than $2 billion in funds last month when Harvard said it wouldn't "concede" to his "demands", including reforming its international student programme.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Harvard could restore its status as a host institution for foreign students if it complied with a list of demands within 72 hours. The demands include "requests for a range of records", such as disciplinary records for international students, plus "audio and video recordings of protest activity", said ABC News.

Harvard is likely to challenge the ban in court. The move will "certainly draw a very strong legal challenge", Elliot Williams, former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, told CNN.

Although there are "well-established" legal processes in place for revoking a school's certification, said Williams, it doesn't seem that Trump's administration has complied with them, so the university would have a "strong basis" for a legal challenge.

What next?

The government's stance could deter overseas students from studying in the US at all, Pippa Norris, a lecturer at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, told The Guardian. "Why would any further international students apply to America, not just Harvard, if they can't know that they’ve got a guaranteed place?"

The administration's actions are likely to benefit other top universities, like Oxford and Cambridge. "The best of the brightest could apply wherever they would," she said. "America, again, is going to have problems as a result."

The Supreme Court appears ready to "bury what remains of church-state separation," said Mark Joseph Stern in Slate. During oral arguments, the court's conservative majority signaled sympathy toward a bid by two Catholic dioceses in Oklahoma to create the nation's first taxpayer-funded religious charter school. Oklahoma's Republican attorney general, Gentner Drummond, sued to block the opening of St. Isidore of Seville, arguing a religious public school would violate state law and the First Amendment's prohibition of government establishment of religion. But to the conservative justices, those arguments amount to little more than "anti-religious bigotry." Justice Brett Kavanaugh complained that Oklahoma's charter program was "open to all comers"—including schools focused on science and Chinese language—"except religion." If, as seems likely, the court compels Oklahoma to fund St. Isidore, it will "transform U.S. public education." Restrictions on religious charter schools in 46 states will be struck down, and every American will be forced "to subsidize the indoctrination of children into faiths they may not share."

Drummond's religion-establishment argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny, said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. The attorney general has warned that if St. Isidore is approved, Oklahoma taxpayers could be forced to fund religious charter schools that most "would consider reprehensible," including ones run by Islamist extremists. But if Oklahoma approves religious charters from multiple faiths, "how is that an 'establishment of religion'?" Precedent is on St. Isidore's side, said Michael Toth and Gavin Schiffres in National Review. The court ruled in 2022 that Maine's exclusion of sectarian schools from a state tuition program violated the First Amendment's ban on religious discrimination. "Withholding a public benefit from students solely because they attend a religiously affiliated charter school is no less discriminatory."

If St. Isidore prevails, "more difficult controversies await down the road," said Stephen L. Carter in Bloomberg. Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wondered during arguments what will happen if a state-funded religious charter school boycotts part of a state-approved curriculum, such as the teaching of evolution. Will courts allow that under the free exercise clause? And what if a school like St. Isidore decides to block the admission of students from other faiths or those with gay parents? However the court decides in this case, it's clear "the issue of religion and education is far from resolved."

Attention "left-wing culture warriors," said Ed Whelan in National Review: Religious families will not accept indoctrination. At the Supreme Court last week, a group of Christian and Muslim parents in a Maryland school district asserted the right to opt their elementary-school-age children out of lessons that use books celebrating same-sex relationships and a transgender child. The lessons, they argued, contradicted the religious teachings they wanted to pass on to their children. They "haven't challenged the curriculum itself" or promoted book banning; they've just asked the district to revert to its pre-2022 policy of allowing opt-outs. In response, the parents say, board members accused them of "hatred" and "aligning with racist xenophobes." If that's true, it's "inexcusable," said Stephen L. Carter in Bloomberg. One group's values should not take automatic precedence over another's, and "a humble respect for diversity is better than a cold and unblinking exercise of authority." That's why a majority of justices are likely to rule in the parents' favor.

The parents' case is "part of a larger campaign," said Robyn Nicole Sanders in Slate. Religious conservatives are waging a political battle "to weaponize parental control as a tool of exclusion"— to define exposure to different ideas and people as a moral offense. The point of teaching such material is to prepare children for a pluralistic society in which LGBTQ people exist, can legally marry, and form families. What if the court decides "parental conscience can trigger opt-outs" from any book or lesson they don't like? Would that include evolution or climate change? Texts containing photos of girls without head coverings? At that point, "the very premise of a shared public education begins to fracture."

As a parent in the district, "I deeply resent the whole mess," said Megan K. Stack in The New York Times. I'm skeptical of the board's claims that allowing opt-outs would be logistically complicated and would do emotional damage to children with same-sex parents or family members. But the religious parents, too, have done plenty of grandstanding by insisting "they can't properly rear their children in faith if the kids get exposed to a few picture books." In the modern, online world, kids will sooner or later be exposed to everything. This divisive battle has been "a demoralizing spectacle" of mutual intolerance and disrespect. Whatever the court decides, "it's already too late for our community to win."

What happened

The Supreme Court's conservative majority Wednesday signaled a willingness to allow public funding for explicitly religious charter schools.

Who said what

Wednesday's oral arguments concerned a bid by the Catholic dioceses of Oklahoma City and Tulsa to launch a religious charter school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, funded through the state's public charter system. Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond (R) sued to stop the plan and the state Supreme Court agreed it violated Oklahoma's constitution.

The case, "one of the biggest on church and state in a generation," could now hinge on whether five conservative justices agree that charter schools are "private entities seeking public grants rather than extensions of the public school system," The Wall Street Journal said. That's "significant," The Washington Post said, "because the government can require public schools to be nonsectarian, but it can’t restrict private schools from teaching religion."

What next?

A victory for St. Isidore's would "extend religion's extraordinary winning streak at the Supreme Court" and "further lower the wall separating church and state," said The New York Times. With Justice Amy Coney Barrett recusing herself, the only court conservative to suggest "recent high court precedent might not require recognition of religious charter schools" was Chief Justice John Roberts, the Journal said. A 4-4 tie would uphold the state ruling against St. Isidore's. Despite his "probing questions of both sides," the Post said, Roberts has "consistently sided with religious parties to expand the role of faith in public life."

What happened

Harvard Monday sued the Trump administration in federal court over its withholding of $2.2 billion in federal grants and contracts, arguing it violates the university's First Amendment rights and federal civil rights law. The Trump administration froze the funding and threatened other punitive measures last week after Harvard rejected its sweeping demands for internal changes and government oversight.

Who said what

Harvard presents the "first major hurdle" in President Donald Trump's "attempt to force change at universities that Republicans say have become hotbeds of liberalism and antisemitism," The Associated Press said. "Targeting research funding which has fueled scientific breakthroughs" has "become an easy source of leverage."

The Trump administration "has not — and cannot — identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen" for "arbitrary and capricious" reasons, Harvard said in its lawsuit. The "consequences of the government's overreach will be severe and long-lasting." Harvard President Alan Garber said. "Taxpayer funds are a privilege," White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said, and the "gravy train of federal assistance to institutions like Harvard" is "coming to an end."

What next?

Harvard appears to have a solid case, as it "looks as though the administration is just sort of doing what it wants to without real concern for what the law is," University of Pennsylvania law professor Kermit Roosevelt told The Washington Post. If Harvard wins, other targeted universities will likely fight back against Trump administration demands, but a loss in court could spell the "end of the resistance."

What happened

Harvard University Monday rejected the Trump administration's sweeping demands for oversight and internal policy changes, calling the effort an unlawful and unconstitutional overreach. Hours later, the administration said it was immediately freezing $2.3 billion in federal grants and contracts to Harvard and its affiliated hospitals and research institutions.

Who said what

Harvard was the first of several top universities to defy funding threats from a Trump administration task force of "little-known bureaucrats" ostensibly focused on rooting out "antisemitic harassment" on campus but also "taking on university culture more broadly in ways that echo the MAGA dreams for remaking higher education," The Wall Street Journal said.

Harvard has undertaken extensive reforms to address antisemitism, but "the university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights," Harvard President Alan Garber said in an open letter. "Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over" by a federal government that seeks to dictate what they can teach, "whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue." The federal antisemitism task force said Harvard's defiance "reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset" in universities that "federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws."

What next

It was not "immediately clear" which grants and contracts were frozen, The Boston Globe said, but the task force's listed targets included grants to "fund biomedical research on topics including tuberculosis, traumatic brain injuries and HIV."

The United States hosts many of the best educational and academic institutions on Earth, and this has been instrumental in securing the country's status as a 21st century global superpower. These schools draw students, teachers and researchers from around the world to help perpetuate the very academic superiority that appealed to them in the first place.

Now, as the White House places various universities and research institutions in its ideological crosshairs, the nation's reputation for academic excellence is in jeopardy. Prospective students and job-seekers must contend with limited funds, the risk of deportation or worse. Suddenly, the United States' global educational appeal seems conspicuously less appealing. Meanwhile, other nations are noting the change, with some making plans to capitalize on America's waning collegiate pull.

'Fire sale on American academics'

"We are witnessing a new brain drain," said Aix Marseille University President Eric Berton in early March, after announcing a new "safe space for science" initiative to help American researchers continue their work at his school in France. So far the project has attracted more than 50 American researchers who have applied to bring their expertise overseas, a university spokesperson said. Universities worldwide have "reported seeing an uptick in applications from U.S.-based researchers" wary of the "increasingly uncertain climate" of the Trump administration, Science.org said. Many institutions see an opportunity to "attract new talent and reverse the steady migration of scientists to the U.S. in recent decades."

"There's a fire sale on American academics right now," University of Washington biology professor Carl Bergstrom said at health and biomedical focused publication STAT. Anxiety over the Trump administration's moves is "so deep" that it could ultimately "undermine the country's enduring position as the world leader in biomedicine," said STAT. The legally dubious detention of lawful U.S. resident students like Columbia University PhD candidate Mahmoud Khalil is "sure to have a chilling effect" not only on foreign-born academics already studying at American institutions but "on the desire of others to go there in the future," The Guardian said.

Concern from members of the academic community is not limited to individual domestic employment prospects but includes the "long-term viability of their research" itself, The New York Times said. The prospect of losing a "generation" of both science and scientists is "something that we cannot recover from," said Pasteur Institute president Yasmine Belkaid, a recently relocated former NIH official, to the Times. The Trump administration's moves "call into question whole swaths of research" — not simply in America, but globally, thanks to international partnerships, French Education minister Philippe Baptiste said in the same article.

'Once-in-a-century brain gain opportunity'

A number of countries are considering the situation in the United States an opportunity for their own academic and research institutions. Canadian universities can be an "entry way for a flood of talent" fleeing American academia, The Hill Times said. China too has begun welcoming "Ph.D. refugees from the U.S." by offering "new academic pathways," Hong Kong's South China Morning Post said. And America's academic upheaval is a "once-in-a-century brain gain opportunity" for Australia as well, said Danielle Cave, senior analyst for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

"Historically" brain drain migration has benefitted the U.S., said Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor of the history of education at the University of Pennsylvania, to the Canadian Broadcast Corporation. There is now a "real danger" that, as a result of the Trump administration's policies, the "drain is going to start going in the opposite direction."

If you qualify, student loan forgiveness can provide a helping hand in digging your way out of student loan debt. The key phrase, however, is if you qualify.

So, who actually qualifies for student loan forgiveness? There are a number of different pathways toward securing this coveted debt respite, and each come with their own set of strict qualification criteria.

Are you on an income-driven repayment (IDR) plan?

"If borrowers who enrolled in IDR plans have a loan balance at the end of their 20- or 25-year loan term, the government forgives the remaining amount of debt," said Yahoo Finance. The Department of Education offers a handful of different IDR repayment plans, designed to lower monthly payments based on income and family size.

This option is only available for federal student loans, and you have to make it through the requisite number of payments until you see that eventual loan forgiveness. The next steps after forgiveness should take place automatically, erasing any amount you had not yet paid.

Do you work for a qualified public service employer?

Another common pathway to student loan forgiveness is Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), an option available to borrowers with federal Direct Loans who work in public service jobs, such as for the government or a non-profit.

To be eligible for PSLF, you must "work full time at a qualifying organization and make 120 on-time loan payments," after which forgiveness is granted, said LendingTree. Further, "those payments must be under a qualifying repayment plan, such as an IDR plan or extended repayment plan."

Do you work full-time as a teacher in a low-income school?

"If you're a teacher, you might be able to ditch up to $17,500 of your federal student loans," said Ramsey Solutions, a personal finance blog — but again, you will have to jump through a number of hoops first.

This includes having Direct Loans or Federal Family Education Loans that you took out before the end of your requisite teaching time and on which you have never had an overdue balance. Plus, you must "teach full time for five academic years in a row," specifically for "low-income students at an educational service agency or at the elementary, middle or high school level," said Ramsey Solutions.

Do you have federal Perkins loans?

If you still have a balance remaining on the no-longer-issued federal Perkins loans, you may find a path toward forgiveness, potentially getting "up to 100% of your Perkins loan canceled," through the Perkins loan cancellation and discharge program, said LendingTree. Generally, a "certain percentage of student loan debt" is forgiven through this program "after every year of service."

This option is available to a wide range of professions "under certain conditions," including educators, law enforcement, first responders, attorneys, military members and health care workers, among others, said Business Insider. "Most recipients work full time for at least one year," said LendingTree, and "additional eligibility requirements vary by profession but often involve working in a high-need or critical shortage area."

"What began in 1998 with Tony Blair standing in the Globe Theatre to announce a new celebration of books has morphed into something much bigger," said William Cash in The Spectator. World Book Day, which sees schoolchildren dress up as their favourite book character on the first Thursday in March, "aims to promote reading for pleasure", said London's The Standard. But schools are increasingly adopting a "more flexible approach", either by ditching "best dressed" awards or abandoning costumes altogether, in response to "growing pressure on parents".

'A bit like childbirth'

World Book Day – those three words are "enough to make most of us break out in a cold sweat", said Nadia Cohen in Metro. Nobody would argue with the "push to promote children's literacy", nor with the almost 15 million £1 book tokens distributed every March. But WBD has "descended into an annual horror show of competitive costume-making, and almost every parent I know hates it with a passion". And let's not pretend it isn't "mostly mums doing the heavy lifting". In that way, WBD is "a bit like childbirth".

It's not just the gender disparity, said Emma Kernahan in The Independent. What's "always overlooked" is that costumes require time or money – or both. And that "that cost is not felt equally". A decade of austerity, a pandemic and a cost-of-living crisis have put nearly a third of children below the poverty line – the very inequalities that WBD "sets out to tackle". Something about "frantically buying disposable merch" from Amazon Prime rather "goes against the spirit of the day".

'Discovering the magic of books'

Here's an idea for parents, said Jen Barton Packer in Metro: "do as little as possible." Don't buy anything; don't make anything. After all, the point of WBD is to "instil a love of reading in the next generation". That has "never been more critical", given that only 34.6% of UK kids enjoy reading for pleasure, according to the National Literacy Trust.

WBD still "inspires me to go to the library, hunt for new books to read, and to snuggle close to my kids" while they "discover new worlds". Have we become so "obsessed with costuming and consumerism" that we've forgotten that WBD is about "discovering the magic of books"?

I too loved WBD and would hate to see it die, said Esther Walker in The i Paper. But it "needs a shake-up". What if children recommended books to one other, like a Secret Santa? Not just fiction, either: the emphasis on costumes has "skewed" WBD towards imaginary worlds, leaving children who prefer non-fiction "cold".

Whatever happens though, the costumes "need to go". Children will either love fiction, or they will "read set texts under sufferance" – and "no amount of Harry Potter costumes can change that".

'The game that shows we're thinking about history all wrong'

Spencer Kornhaber at The Atlantic

The game "Civilization VII" makes a "radical change by firmly segmenting the experience into — here's that word — eras," says Spencer Kornhaber. "Eras are an imprecise tool to make sense of the messy past." Game developers have "argued that the eras system is realistic," but in the most recent version of the game, "history also feels overdetermined." Playing "Civilization" used to "feel like living through an endless dawn of possibility," but this time, you're not in command of history; history is in command of you, and it's assigning you busywork."

Read more

'Learning cursive is an important skill, but should it be mandatory in today's tech age?'

Yvette Walker at The Kansas City Star

Some "think cursive is an important skill," but there's debate over whether it should be required in the modern technological age, says Yvette Walker. One "factor against it is the extra level of rigor for left-handed students." You "might not be able to write it, but you should be able to read it." If there is a "way to build an understanding of cursive into the system without busting the budget or losing another important skill, I'd be up for that."

Read more

'What anti-Musk Democrats can learn from Steve Bannon'

Ross Barkan at Intelligencer

Steve Bannon has made it his "mission to destroy Elon Musk, the new bête noire of Democrats," says Ross Barkan, and "liberals who share that goal — and want to boost their working-class credibility — might want to pay attention to how he's doing it." Bannon's "attacks are potentially potent because he understands the stakes of this battle." Musk "cares far more about his business and tech interests than the fate of working-class America."

Read more

'Cut climate emissions by ticketing the worst offenders, like speeding drivers'

Antoine Rostand at The Hill

If the world "rolls over on methane regulations, we'll need to change tack to bring down methane quickly," says Antoine Rostand. The "best way to do this is to narrow the scope of the regulations and target so-called 'super-emitters.'" Holding "methane super-emitters to account, as opposed to scrutinizing the entire lifecycle emissions of fossil fuels, would be a much more straightforward and effective policy" than the "more arcane rules that the United States is set to tear up."

Read more

'School choice revs up again in the states'

The Wall Street Journal editorial board

School choice has been "on a roll in Republican-led states, and the momentum is continuing this year," says The Wall Street Journal editorial board. That's "all the more important after the demoralizing recent national test score results." School choice is "crucial to free parents and children from the monopoly control of unions that care first about dues-paying teachers." Republicans can also "use the recent national test results to press for more accountability on curriculum, attendance and graduation rates."

Read more

'Is Congress fine with giving up its war powers?'

Daniel DePetris at the Chicago Tribune

There's a "fundamental power that Congress as an institution has largely deferred to the executive without so much as a protest: the power to declare war," says Daniel DePetris, but "successive U.S. presidents have repeatedly proffered expansive theories on why the president as commander in chief possesses the right to take military action without congressional approval." This "does the nation a grave disservice by upending the Constitution, removing the guardrails so critical to stopping bad decisions."

Read more

'Pope Francis is ready to take on MAGA'

Theo Zenou at Foreign Policy

Pope Francis "clearly doesn't think that Trump has been anointed by God and is more likely to be praying for his failure than his success," says Theo Zenou. The "pope has a history of opposing the U.S. leader." Francis "might look like an easy target," but "unlike other heads of state, Trump can't browbeat him. The reason is simple: The president has no leverage on the pope." Trump "can't slap tariffs on Vatican City."

Read more

'Why voice notes are a small act of love'

Rainesford Stauffer at Time

Based on how many people "describe getting a voice note as a personal, mini-podcast, getting to listen to each other is a meaningful way to stay in touch that liking an Instagram story just isn't," says Rainesford Stauffer. But "voice notes remain somewhat divisive: Though many apps have a transcription feature for voice notes, communicating this way isn't accessible to everyone." It's a "small act of love" to "want to talk to someone — however you choose to."

Read more

The crisis in providing for children with special educational needs and disabilities risks creating a "lost generation" of young people if it isn't tackled urgently, the parliamentary watchdog has said.

A report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warns that the current system of support for those with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) is "unviable". "Almost half" of local authorities face bankruptcy trying to fulfil provisions in their area, and families face a "postcode lottery" of waiting times for services.

The government was criticised by the "damning report" for "failing to deliver better outcomes for children" as well as lacking "any potential solution" to a rise in demand and the "existential threat" facing many local authorities, said The Guardian.

What did the commentators say?

The PAC report makes "clear the dire situation" and why the government "must take immediate action", said Joey Nettleton Burrows of the National Autistic Society in Learning Disability Today. Many children "can’t get the help" they need and "miss out on years of education", while their families are "forced to spend time and energy fighting long battles to get support for their children". He urged the government to "commit to all the recommendations in the report" to end the crisis.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has accepted the report findings but has asked for "a bit of patience” to address issues. But there is "no time to wait" with the "system in crisis", said The i Paper. There are "deep-rooted problems" but those inside the Send system know what it needs to be brought back "from the brink". This includes "improving mainstream school Send provision", introducing "more special schools and specialist staff", and resisting "further cuts in the Budget" to local councils.

Meanwhile, many parents face "waiting times of several years" just to get a "diagnostic assessment" of their children before even being able to try to access Send resources, said The Guardian. Those parents denied education, health and care plans are then often going on to obtain them through appeal at tribunal, leaving councils at the "mercy of tribunals demanding that needs must be met, regardless of financial deficits". For parents, however, it can take "years of 'battle'" and personal financial sacrifice to "secure adequate support".

To make real change, though, those involved in education planning need to "reframe" the thinking around the "reality of learner complexity" to start to meet the needs of Send children within mainstream schools, said Margaret Mulholland in TES magazine.

Currently, by thinking of "diverse learners" as "costly" we "risk excluding them", and though "diversity and difference" is more and more recognised, it is "often oversimplified in education policy" and tailored to "homogenous" cohorts, she said. The education secretary must ask whether "our education system removes barriers to learning or creates them".

What next?

A report by the National Audit Office in October recommended the government carries out "wholesale reform" of the system, which has become an "adversarial battle between cash-strapped councils and desperate families", said The Guardian.

The government previously said that change to Send provision "will take time", and that it was focused on "mainstream provision and more early intervention". It is planning to write off £3.2 billion in "high-needs spending" deficits for local authorities and provide them with "sustainable long-term funding".

However, "money alone will not fix the educational needs of Send children", said Stefano Hatfield in The i Paper, and the current problem is an example of "two-tier Britain in action". The answer is "more, better trained, in-school professionals, as well as parents being more honest about their own children’s needs", he said. But the "reality is that we all have to manage our expectations about what a little money can achieve, however painful that is".

'What are the emotional risks of losing a student to such an injustice?'

Larry Strauss at USA Today

As President-elect Donald Trump plans for the largest deportation operation in American history, "I am left wondering where that leaves me and my colleagues, those of us whose students are the children of — and in some cases themselves — the people the Trump administration plans to make refugees of," says Larry Strauss. Many teachers "anticipate facing difficult choices," not just about "cooperating with authorities," but also in "dealing with the aftermath of fractured families and shattered lives."

Read more

'I suggest we consider eye contact as an art form'

Michael Chad Hoeppner at Time

"Eye contact, once a cornerstone of human connection, is becoming increasingly rare in our screen-dominated lives," says Michael Chad Hoeppner. "This decline reflects a cultural shift away from face-to-face engagement, one that has profound implications for how we communicate and connect." Attempting more regular eye contact will "give you an opportunity to connect more deeply and vividly with those around you, allowing you to notice the subtleties of human interaction that enrich your day-to-day experiences."

Read more

'Why do we game?'

Stephen Bush at The Financial Times

"Why are ancient dig sites littered with backgammon sets and mancala pieces? Why do ancient urns depict Achilles and Ajax bent in concentration over some sort of dice game? I think there are two answers," says Stephen Bush. "The first is that gaming is a lot of fun," and the second is that "gaming doesn't only entertain: gaming often reveals." While "games amuse us," they also "tell us truths about our characters that are often kept hidden."

Read more

'Russia … cannot be allowed to once again escape accountability'

Max Boot at The Washington Post

After an Azerbaijan Airlines flight crashed on Christmas Day, killing 38 people, an investigation "concluded that a Russian antiaircraft missile most likely brought down the plane," says Max Boot. While "Russian spokesmen blamed a bird collision," the Kremlin, "given its history, has not earned the benefit of the doubt." If Russia is responsible, "the question now is what, if anything, the West will do about it," Boot adds. This is "another argument" for increased "support for Ukraine in resisting Russian aggression."

Read more

Donald Trump comes into office having pledged the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education. His administration will send "all education and education work and needs back to the states," he said in 2023. What does the Department of Education specifically do?

The Education Department was created by President Jimmy Carter in 1980 with a mission to "advise and assist" the nation's schools, said CBS News. The department has a budget of around $228 billion, but it's not the primary funder of your neighborhood schools: Only about 8% of local school budgets come from federal dollars, with the rest coming from state and local taxes. The department also undergirds federal student aid programs for colleges and universities. That money gives the feds leverage over education policy across the country. "It may have influence," said Nicola Alexander, an associate dean at the University of Minnesota. "I wouldn't say it has control."

K-12: Supporting low-income students

Federal funding might make up a small portion of K-12 school budgets, but it's a critical part. The department backs local schools "primarily through programs supporting economically disadvantaged school systems," said USAFacts. The department disperses $18 billion a year for Title I programs for children from low-income families. It also spends $15 billion a year on special education funding, as well as $6 billion on other school improvement programs. The department additionally oversees the National Center for Education Statistics to "better analyze enrollment, finances, and performance metrics" at schools across the country, said USAFacts.

The department enforces laws that "protect civil rights and disability rights in public schools," said Education Week. That includes making sure that the needs of students with disabilities are being met — and being on guard against racial and sexual discrimination within schools. The department's supporters say it "plays an important role in ensuring students are treated fairly," the outlet added.

Higher ed: Financial aid and Title IX

The Department of Education's K-12 efforts get the most public attention, but its "biggest expenditure is on higher education," said The New York Times. More than 70% of its budget goes to the federal student loan program — $90 billion a year in student loans, and another $39 billion for Pell Grants to low-income students. Some education advocates worry about what Trump's pledges to eliminate the department mean for that financial aid, said Inside Higher Ed: His first administration proposed "large cuts to financial aid" — including a proposed $5.6 billion cut in 2020.

The department also enforces Title IX, the 1972 law that prohibits colleges and universities from discriminating against students on the basis of sex. That law has been used to "provide equal opportunities to women's sports athletes," said Front Office Sports. But that enforcement has been spotty at times, and one investigation found that 87% of major universities were out of compliance. The Biden administration has interpreted the law to apply to transgender people, though the Trump administration will probably reverse course. "Trump would not need Congressional authority to make changes on Title IX's guidance," said Time.

Congress, of course, would have to approve eliminating the Department of Education. Which means the department continues to exist for now. After the election, NPR said, Trump said he would appoint Linda McMahon — best known from the world of professional wrestling — as his Secretary of Education.

On Nov. 19, President-elect Donald Trump named former wrestling executive Linda McMahon, who led the Small Business Administration from 2017 to 2019, to head the Department of Education. McMahon served for a year on the Connecticut Board of Education from 2009 to 2010 and spent extended time on the Board of Trustees of Sacred Heart University between 2004 and 2017, but overall has a comparatively limited education background. That alone is likely to make her nomination controversial, although with a 53-seat majority in the Senate, Republicans may be able to steward all but the most problematic nominees through the confirmation process.

From wrestling power couple to politics

A native of New Bern, North Carolina, the 76 year-old married her high school sweetheart Vince McMahon in 1966. The McMahons founded Titan Sports, Inc. in 1980 and expanded it into a multi-billion dollar global empire, now called World Wrestling Entertainment. She and Vince McMahon, from whom she is now estranged, have been the subject of multiple sexual assault and sexual trafficking allegations. One suit, filed by former "ring boys," alleged that the couple was aware that one of their employees was sexually assaulting them and did nothing to stop it. That lawsuit "is filled with scurrilous lies, exaggerations and misrepresentations," said Linda McMahon's attorney Laura Brevetti at CNN.

Before her appointment to the Small Business Administration in 2017, McMahon twice tried unsuccessfully to win a Senate seat in Connecticut, first in 2010. She subsequently outran 2012 Republican presidentIal nominee Mitt Romney by 6 points in her second race but could not overcome the state's heavy Democratic lean. And in both campaigns, scandals and accusations regarding the McMahons' wrestling empire were a major line of attack. "It was her greatest strength and weakness at the same time," said Murphy advisor Scott Bates at The Connecticut Post.

McMahon spent almost $100 million of her own fortune on the Senate runs. Wealthy self-funded candidates like McMahon "typically fade from popular memory" after a defeat, said Michelle Hackman at the Yale Daily News, but instead she continued to wield her fundraising prowess and influence. After her second loss, she was "a failed candidate still engaged in the GOP," said Simone Pathé at Roll Call.

The rise of a Trump ally

McMahon was one of Trump's earliest backers in 2016 and has served on the 2024 Trump transition effort since August, helping to vet other potential cabinet picks. She will step into an unusual situation for a cabinet secretary, since Trump repeatedly promised to abolish the Department of Education. McMahon has been "assigned the fraught task of carrying out what is widely expected to be a thorough and determined dismantling of the department's core functions," said Zach Montague and Ana Swanson at The New York Times. However, the president would need Congress to pass the bill, a move that would be very difficult to accomplish given the GOP's narrow majorities.

Trump's Agenda 47 platform called for a broad variety of new education policies, many of them involving controversial culture war issues like trans rights. As president, Trump would "turn back the tide of left-wing indoctrination and once again respect the fundamental right of parents to control the education, healthcare, and moral formation of their children," said the campaign in its Agenda 47 education page. The campaign called for funding to go to districts that eliminate tenure for teachers and give parents the right to elect school principals. The campaign also said it would try to force colleges and universities to eliminate their DEI programs and may threaten to ban federal loans to those that won't comply.

McMahon has not said which aspects of the Trump campaign education agenda she would prioritize and did not address education in her speech at the 2024 Republican National Convention. She has long been a supporter of school choice and vouchers dating back to her brief stint on the Connecticut Board of Education. McMahon's "chief goal for education is to promote vouchers, which drain resources from public schools," said Amanda Litvinov at NEA Today.

'Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson is the absurd spectacle we deserve'

Will Leitch at The New York Times

The Jake Paul-Mike Tyson fight "ended after eight soporific rounds," and the "problem with spectacle as an end to itself is that it crowds out actual quality," says Will Leitch. It is "one thing to watch a farcical fight; it's another entirely when farcical fights are all that are left." People are "seeing this phenomenon not just in boxing or in other sports, but in many aspects of American society," and it is "instantly disposable content."

Read more

'What Islam taught me about accepting defeat'

Shadi Hamid at The Washington Post

Even "when we know we have lost, it is not easy to lose well, so we must look for other resources where we can find them," says Shadi Hamid. Islam "has been a source of strength in this regard." Religion is "about befriending reality rather than resisting it," and "loss and suffering are inescapable." There is "something liberating in the idea that we got it wrong, because then at least we can do better next time."

Read more

'Trump's unconstitutional recess appointment scheme'

Andrew C. McCarthy at the National Review

Speaker Mike Johnson "should not give the time of day to a manufactured recess scheme that is patently designed to erase Senate constitutional authority," says Andrew C. McCarthy. There is "no reason for either congressional chamber not to be in session, much less to be disagreeing about whether they should be in session." If a "person, no matter how loyal, cannot reasonably hope to be confirmed by a Senate in firm Republican control, then that person should not be a nominee."

Read more

'Access to climate education is a matter of justice'

Alexia Leclercq at Al Jazeera

We "increasingly find ourselves in a situation where the survival of human civilization is at stake," and "while the near future seems bleak, our education systems are nowhere near providing children with the right tools and knowledge to help them understand it," says Alexia Leclercq. Schools are "simply inadequate to prepare new generations for living in an era of climate change and taking action on it." We "must ensure that young people are equipped to tackle the climate crisis."

Read more