Improving Educational Outcomes

That giant sucking sound you hear is an estimated $4 billion dollars suddenly disappearing from the coffers of colleges because of a new reimbursement policy announced by the NIH last week.   Academic research is one of America's crown jewels. At some point in our lives, we've all been impacted by discoveries made in university labs. It may take time to understand the downstream effects of this policy. Will universities abandon research? Perhaps, starting with smaller institutions that lack infrastructure and can't afford to do much independently. But many colleges have invested heavily in becoming “research universities” to burnish their brands. Walking away from that investment won't be easy.   Then there’s the cost to the university. Some 20 years ago, researchers found that unreimbursed costs from research weren’t to blame increases in college tuition. Today’s financial landscape in higher education bears little resemblance to that era.  University budgets are a complex cocktail of cross subsidies. And colleges were already facing much higher costs for their athletic ambitions, global footprint, and graduate education.   So what might happen next?    We're likely to see a growing divide between who does research and who doesn't. Maybe some big privates with lots of money in the bank (i.e. Harvard) will decide it's still worth it. Some states with huge budgets and big industry (i.e. New York, Caifornia, and Texas) might be willing to take on their federal subsidy themselves. And other universities will lean into what makes sense for them.    But in the end, as one university CFO told me, higher ed subsidizing federal research has always been a choice. "It’s never been a financial winner," he said. "If you blow up that careful balance, then what?" The future of federal research at universities and what downstream effects this might have (i.e. tuition) in the latest edition of my newsletter, Next.

500 students share one computer in Niger. Yet they're conducting advanced physics experiments that students at elite schools can't access. The secret? WebAR turning basic smartphones into portable STEM labs. Think about that. In Sub-Saharan Africa, fewer than 10% of schools have internet. Student-to-computer ratios hit 500:1. Yet mobile subscriptions jumped from single digits to 80% in a decade. Students already carry the infrastructure—we just weren't using it right. Traditional EdTech Reality: ↳ VR headsets: $300+ per student ↳ Heavy apps requiring 5G speeds ↳ Labs costing millions to build ↳ Rural schools: permanently excluded The WebAR Revolution: ↳ Runs in any browser, optimized for 3G ↳ No app store, minimal storage ↳ Science scores improving 10-15% ↳ Every smartphone becomes a laboratory But here's what grabbed me: A physics teacher in rural South Africa has one broken oscilloscope. No budget. Her students scan printed markers, and electromagnetic fields pulse across their desks. They run experiments infinitely—no equipment damaged, no reagents consumed. One student told her: "Engineering is for people like me now. The lab fits in my pocket." What changes everything: ↳ Mobile-first matches actual connectivity ↳ Browser-based works offline ↳ Teachers need training, not new buildings ↳ Inequality becomes irrelevant The Multiplication Effect: 1 teacher with markers = 30 students experimenting 10 schools sharing content = communities transformed 100 districts adopting = educational equality emerging At scale = STEM education without infrastructure gaps We spent decades waiting for labs that won't arrive. Now any browser becomes one. Because when a student in rural Africa explores the same 3D molecules as someone at MIT—using the phone already in their pocket—you realize: WebAR isn't shiny technology. It's a quiet equaliser making world-class STEM education fit into 3G connections and $50 phones. Follow me, Dr. Martha Boeckenfeld for innovations where accessibility drives transformation. ♻️ Share if you believe quality education shouldn't require perfect infrastructure.

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about this: Does more curriculum mean more learning? Turns out, the answer is no. And the evidence is both humbling and powerful. Countries like India and Tanzania made bold moves to simplify their curricula and the impact has been remarkable. 📚 India (NCERT Rationalisation) reduced about 30% of textbook content to focus on core literacy and numeracy. ➡️ The result? A +0.25 standard deviation improvement in learning outcomes — the equivalent of an entire extra year of learning. (Source: World Bank, J-PAL) ✂️ Tanzania’s 3R curriculum dropped non-core subjects and devoted 80% of classroom time to foundational reading, writing, and arithmetic. ➡️ That shift led to a +0.20 SD gain in reading, and a major decline in learning poverty. (Source: RTI International, World Bank) Meanwhile, in Pakistan, our current curriculum is still overcrowded, full of complex topics, early grammar, and overwhelming assessment pressure. The result? Most students can’t read or do basic math by Grade 3. We’ve been advocating for change and the proposed reforms aim to do exactly what worked elsewhere: 👉 Cut down on non-essentials 👉 Prioritize foundational reading and math 👉 Reduce assessment overload 👉 Go deeper, not broader My brilliant, superstar colleague Mariam Ali Bokhari made this radar chart that neatly illustrates this concept. It shows how far we still have to go but also what’s possible if we stay focused on what actually works. Less content. More learning. That’s the goal. #CurriculumReform #FLN #PakistanEducation #EducationPolicy #LearningPoverty #Taleemabad #FoundationalLiteracy #EdEquity #LessIsMore #EvidenceBased

The antidote to academic dishonesty isn’t stricter monitoring—it’s deeper engagement. After more than 30 years in education, I’ve learned that students cheat when they see no purpose in their learning. But when we bridge the gap between curriculum and real-world application, something remarkable happens: students become invested in their own growth. Key strategies that work: • Connect every lesson to tangible outcomes • Share stories of how past students used these skills • Invite industry professionals to show practical applications • Create projects that solve real community problems In this way, you will have students who are too engaged in authentic learning to consider shortcuts or cheating with AI. How are you making learning meaningful in your field? I’d love to hear your approaches. #EducationalLeadership #StudentEngagement #TeachingStrategy #ProfessionalDevelopment #EducationInnovation

🏠 17,000 Home Visits. 12 States. One Clear Truth: We've Been Getting School Attendance All Wrong. I'm pleased to share my latest article: "Why Students Miss School, and Why We Miss the Point: Lessons Learned from Concentric Educational Solutions' 17,000+ Home Visits in 2024-2025." As a researcher and a father, this work challenged everything I thought I knew about chronic absenteeism. While my wife Marshella and I struggled with our own "privileged chaos" of getting kids out the door each morning, our team at Concentric Educational Solutions was revolutionizing how we understand attendance challenges by going directly into homes across America, listening to families facing impossible choices with insufficient resources. What Concentric's groundbreaking approach revealed: • Behind every absence statistic is a family story—not a character flaw • Students missing school to care for disabled parents or younger siblings • Families choosing between transportation to school or transportation to work • Children avoiding school due to untreated trauma, bullying, and safety fears • Parents facing truancy court for circumstances completely beyond their control The hard truth: Our punitive approach to attendance—truancy courts, penalties, threatening letters—adds punishment to circumstances that demand support. Concentric's transformative model: Rather than blame families, we provide comprehensive community support that recognizes attendance challenges as symptoms of systemic failures requiring systemic solutions. Our home-visit methodology doesn't just collect data—it builds relationships, identifies real barriers, and connects families to resources that address root causes. The path forward: We need comprehensive community support systems that address housing, healthcare, transportation, and safety as educational issues, not separate concerns. Every child has a story. Every absence has a context. Concentric Educational Solutions is pioneering the compassionate, evidence-based approach our students deserve. Read the full article to understand why attendance challenges are symptoms of systemic failures, not individual shortcomings—and how Concentric's innovative work is showing us what true educational equity looks like. #EducationEquity #StudentAttendance #SystemicChange #CommunitySupport #EducationalResearch #ConcentricEducationalSolutions

Higher education is facing another major shift. Congress just amended the Higher Education Act of 1965. And while the headlines focus on loan reform, the real impact may be in new accountability rules and its impact on graduate programs. 𝗡𝗲𝘄 “𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆” 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 : -- Master’s alumni must earn more than someone with a bachelor’s degree in a similar academic discipline 𝟲 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀 after graduation. -- PhD alumni must earn more than someone with a bachelor’s degree in a similar academic discipline 𝟭𝟬 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀 after graduation. Programs that fail to meet these standards will lose eligibility for federal student loans. This updated legislation is simpler and more punitive than the Financial Value Transparency Framework created by the Biden administration. Most likely, the new legislation will be the de facto criteria for graduate programs, and the FVT will apply to undergraduate programs. Only time will tell. What we do know: the wage premium for master’s degrees has been declining, and salaries for mid-career professionals are increasingly based on skills and experience rather than credentials (https://lnkd.in/g_sR3Beq). A study by Third Way found that 43% of in-person master’s programs did not leave alumni able to out-earn someone with a bachelor’s degree in their state. Many PhDs who exit academia tend to work in careers they could have entered with a bachelor’s or master’s degree. Humanities and Social Science programs, where too many alumni remain in adjunct positions after graduation, will be impacted, as will STEM programs where PhD spend significant years in low-pay postdoc positions. ➡️𝗜𝗻 𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗷𝗼𝗯 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁, 𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗱𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿. Programs that depend on federal students loans will need to ensure their alumni out-earn someone with a bachelor’s degree. Which means they’ll need to be able to be able to articulate the value of their graduate degrees to employers. For partners: Keep an eye on an email I’m sending out shortly with what’s happening in Beyond Prof & Beyond Grad School and resources to continue to support you. For all of us in grad education: Job searching is not intuitive, and grad students need to learn proven strategies to be successful. The job market has changed drastically in the last few years, and your students need your support in navigating this unprecedented terrain. 

Investments in people will not only help you to achieve your organizational goals, but it will create a culture of trust and encouragement. I was inspired by this recent blog from Laura Bernhard, PhD at California Competes about a recent initiative at San Diego Mesa College in preparing faculty for the growing demands of online instruction, and doing so by investing in the professional growth of those faculty. https://lnkd.in/gNb7SE_2 We did something similar at San Mateo County Community College District during the pandemic. Courses moved online, and there was a recognition that homegrown, project-based professional development was the key for our faculty. But what determined if someone was faculty? Tenure or tenure-track? Contingent/adjunct? Lecturer? Middle College? Dual enrollment? If you were to tease out the entirety of the group, the # of faculty reached close to 1000, more than 3x the number if we just stayed with traditional 'tenure/tenure-track' thinking. What did we do? We invested in people. We amended an existing four-week online teaching course. We aligned instructional designers and faculty support coaches to be onboarding courses every other week. We kept the faculty coaches available after the work was done. We made the course cumulative; the lessons of Week 1 were applied in practice in Week 2, and the theory of Week 2 was practiced in Week 3...so by the end of Week 4 the faculty had not only been certified in online education but had built *more than 80% of an online course* - and all of this in 25 hours! Oh yeah, and we funded it too. Learners were compensated. Support faculty were compensated. Designers were compensated. It was expensive. But by the end of the 2020 Summer, more than 85% of *ALL* instructors in the San Mateo County Community College District had successfully completed the course - tenure, adjunct, high school dual enrollment teacher, etc. By the end of the Fall, that number was above 90%. Learning is predicated by presence. The presence of the online committee and district leadership that resulted in the high-price decision to fund people not products resulted in a culture change, a recognition of the online environment and a presence in those spaces for students, for each other, and for the broader community.

The most impactful change I’ve made in my classroom over the past few years is a simple exercise that came out of my work in #engineering education assessment.   At the start of each class period, I spend 1 minute discussing our #learning goals for class that day.   On our course website, I put these goals at the top of the page for each class to remind students what they should be able to do having followed the class, done the practice problems, and read the book.   When writing these goals, I keep the following in mind: 👩🏻🏫  What do my #students need to take with them from this class? 🌏  What fundamental knowledge should they learn, and how does this relate to the real-world? 👩🏻🔬 What is the “action” I want them to do? I try to state goals in a Bloom’s taxonomy framework where their knowledge gains are hierarchical in terms of their ability to do something.   How has doing this helped my students? 🙋🏻♀️ They ask more focused questions during class that show engagement with the goals and material. 👩🏻🎓 They know the goals of their studying and have a sense of mastery when it comes to exam time.   How has this helped me as an #instructor? 🙄 I don’t need to answer that “what’s on the test” question anymore. I point them to the learning goals. 🫶 When they’re stressed, I can better target what information is unclear by asking them “do you know how to do…?” and help them focus on that material. 🧐 It forces me to craft lectures and activities that align with our goals, rather than just what’s in a textbook, making my class more engaging and streamlining material presentation. If we're going to assess students' learning, we need to "write our own exam" by determining what they should know at the end of a course. Why not share this information with them? By letting students know the goals of the course - and thus what we're assessing them on - we empower them. This in no way tells them "how" to get an A. They still have to do the hard work of learning. But it helps them focus their studying efforts and benchmark their attainment.

Universities and colleges put enormous effort into welcoming new students. Orientation weeks are colourful, busy, and full of opportunities to connect, but research shows that the sense of belonging students gain in those early days often fades as the semester progresses. The challenge, and opportunity, is for practitioners to design approaches that sustain belonging beyond the first few weeks. A recent study (International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, October 2024) examined how students navigate educational transitions and highlighted the importance of realistic preparation, sustained connection, and the role of educators in shaping belonging. Drawing on the study, here are five domains to guide practice: 1️⃣ Prepare by setting realistic expectations. Too often, students arrive with glossy images of university life, only to feel blindsided by the pace, workload, or challenges of forming new friendships. Providing honest, balanced information before arrival helps normalise difficulty and reduce the shock of transition. Examples could include current student or alumni-led Q&A sessions, “What I wish I’d known” videos and resources.   2️⃣ Connect by creating micro-moments not just big events. Large welcome events can spark initial excitement, but belonging is sustained through everyday micro-connections - someone to sit with in class, a lecturer remembering your name, a peer inviting you to coffee. Encourage tutors to use ice breakers beyond week one, support student leaders to facilitate ongoing low-barrier activities that foster peer and staff connection like weekly walks or shared study sessions. 3️⃣ Empower educations as ‘belonging builders.’ The research reinforces that educators play a critical role in student wellbeing. Approachability, empathy, and inclusivity from teaching staff often matter as much as peer friendships. Small practices like checking in, learning names, or acknowledging diverse perspectives can have outsized impact. 4️⃣ Integrate by addressing compounding transitions. Academic demands, social shifts, housing changes, and wellbeing challenges often overlap. Students rarely experience these in isolation, and when combined, they intensify stress and risk of disengagement. Consider integrated and holistic advising models where academic, wellbeing, and housing staff collaborate to support students. 5️⃣ Monitor, recognising loneliness as an early signal Finally, loneliness is often the first indicator of deeper wellbeing issues. Monitoring connection levels can provide an early warning system for support. Use pulse surveys, quick check-ins in tutorials, or digital tools to flag students at risk of isolation, paired with clear referral and early intervention pathways (e.g., peer connectors, student mentors, proactive outreach). 🔗 Read the full study: https://lnkd.in/gjvUH6sa

Higher education drives two-thirds of all upward mobility in the UK – yet social mobility has stalled despite growing numbers of students. How can both be true? That paradox is at the heart of our new The Sutton Trust report, partnering with Carnegie Corporation of New York and led by Rachel Brooks at University of Oxford, exploring how higher education (HE) supports social mobility across high-income countries. In the UK, university accounts for around two-thirds of all upward mobility among those from non-graduate families (see graph). Graduates from these backgrounds have a 32% chance of reaching top-earner status — just below the 36% rate for those with graduate parents, and far above the 12% for their peers without degrees. The story is similar in the US. So, if more disadvantaged students are entering university, why hasn’t this translated into greater mobility? My take: As participation has expanded, the earnings premium associated with a degree has declined for disadvantaged students. University still boosts the likelihood of becoming a top earner – but not quite as much as in the past. Crucially, the highest labour-market returns are concentrated among graduates of the most selective universities, where access gaps remain wide. Meanwhile, disadvantaged students are more likely to attend less-selective institutions that play a vital role in widening opportunity, but typically deliver lower, although still good, earnings outcomes. At the same time, non-graduate routes have not kept pace. As more grads move into top-earning roles, those without degrees – still disproportionately from poorer families – risk being crowded out. Unless technical and vocational pathways are strengthened and properly rewarded, inequality may deepen as higher education grows. So what needs to change if we’re serious about driving social mobility at the system level? Three big priorities: 1. Close access gaps at the top. Redouble efforts not just to raise the numbers of disadvantaged students entering HE, but to close the still-wide gaps at the most prestigious institutions – those that deliver the biggest labour-market returns. 2. Boost outcomes across the system. Improve outcomes for students at less-selective universities, who are still more likely to come from disadvantaged backgrounds – ensuring their earnings gains are maximised. 3. Strengthen high-quality non-graduate routes. The fact that university dominates mobility reflects not only the success of HE, but the weakness of alternatives. Most disadvantaged young people still pursue non-graduate paths – and these must offer real opportunities for success. Until we act decisively, social mobility will remain stalled. Across high-income countries, young people from non-graduate families are still 45% less likely to become top earners than their privileged peers. That gap isn’t inevitable. Big thanks also to Benjamin Hart Golo Henseke David Mills, James Robson, and Xin Xu on the academic team.