The recent escape of several research monkeys after the truck carrying them overturned on a Mississippi interstate is the latest glimpse into the secretive industry of animal research and the processes that allow key details of what happened to be kept from the public.
Three monkeys have remained on the loose since the crash on Tuesday in a rural area along Interstate 59, spilling wooden crates labeled “live monkeys” into the tall grass near the highway. Since then, searchers in masks, face shields and other protective equipment have scoured nearby fields and woods for the missing primates. Five of the 21 Rhesus macaques on board were killed during the search, according to the local sheriff, but it was unclear how that happened.
Mississippi authorities have not disclosed the driver’s name, the company involved in transporting the monkeys, where the monkeys were headed or who owns them. While Tulane University in New Orleans has acknowledged that the monkeys had been housed at its National Biomedical Research Center in Covington, Louisiana, it said it doesn’t own them and won’t identify who does.
The questions surrounding the Mississippi crash and the mystery of why the animals were traveling through the South are remarkable, animal advocates say.
“When a truck carrying 21 monkeys crashes on a public highway, the community has a right to know who owned those animals, where they were being sent, and what diseases they may have been exposed to and harbored simply by being caught up in the primate experimentation industry,” said Lisa Jones-Engel, senior science adviser on primate experimentation with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
“It is highly unusual — and deeply troubling — that Tulane refuses to identify its partner in this shipment,” Jones-Engel added.
Transporting research animals typically requires legally binding contracts that prevent the parties involved from disclosing information, Tulane University said in a statement to The Associated Press. That’s done for the safety of the animals and to protect proprietary information, the New Orleans-based university said.
“To the best of Tulane’s knowledge, the 13 recovered animals remain in the possession of their owner and are en route to their original destination,” the statement said.
The crash has drawn a range of reactions — from conspiracy theories that suggest a government plot to sicken people to serious responses from people who oppose experimenting on animals.
“How incredibly sad and wrong,” Republican U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said of the crash.
“I’ve never met a taxpayer that wants their hard-earned dollars paying for animal abuse nor who supports it,” the Georgia congresswoman said in a post on the social platform X. “This needs to end!”
Tulane’s Covington center receives $35 million annually in National Institutes of Health support, and its partners include nearly 500 investigators from more than 155 institutions globally, the school said in an Oct. 9 news release. The center has been funded by NIH since 1964, and federal grants are a significant source of income for the institution, it said.
In July, some of the research center’s 350 employees held a ribbon-cutting ceremony to mark the opening of a new 10,000-square-foot office building and a new laboratory at the facility. This fall, the facility’s name was changed from the Tulane National Primate Research Center to the Tulane National Biomedical Research Center to reflect its broader mission, university officials announced.
The Mississippi crash is one of at least three major monkey escapes in the U.S. over the past four years.
Last November, 43 Rhesus macaques escaped from a South Carolina compound that breeds them for medical research after an enclosure wasn’t fully locked. Employees from the Alpha Genesis facility in Yemassee, South Carolina, set up traps to capture them. However, some spent two months that winter living in the woods and weathering a rare snowstorm. By late January, the last four escapees were recaptured after being lured back into captivity by peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.
In January 2022, several cynomolgus macaque monkeys escaped when a truck towing a trailer of about 100 of the animals collided with a dump truck on a Pennsylvania highway, authorities said. The monkeys were headed to a quarantine facility in an undisclosed location after arriving at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York on a flight from Mauritius, an Indian Ocean island nation, authorities said. A spokesperson for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said all of the animals were accounted for within about a day, though three were euthanized for undisclosed reasons.
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin became the 36th state to limit cellphones and other electronic devices in school Friday, when its Democratic governor signed a bill requiring districts to prohibit phone use during class time.
The measure passed with bipartisan support, though some Democrats in the Legislature said controlling gun violence should be a higher priority than banning cellphones.
In signing the bill, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers said he believes that decisions like this should be made at the local level, but “my promise to the people of Wisconsin is to always do what’s best for our kids, and that obligation weighs heavily on me in considering this bill.”
Evers said he was “deeply concerned” about the impacts of cellphone and social media use on young people. He said cellphones could be “a major distraction from learning, a source of bullying, and a barrier to our kids’ important work of just being a kid.”
This school year alone, new restrictions on phone use in schools went into effect in 17 states and the District of Columbia. The push to limit cellphone use has been rapid. Florida was the first state to pass such a law, in 2023.
Both Democrats and Republicans have taken up the cause, reflecting a growing consensus that phones are bad for kids’ mental health and take their focus away from learning, even as some researchers say the issue is less clear-cut.
Most school districts in Wisconsin had already restricted cellphone use in the classroom, according to a Wisconsin Policy Forum report. The bill passed by the Legislature on Oct. 14 would require school districts to enact policies prohibiting the use of cellphones during instructional time.
Of the 36 states that restrict cellphones in school, phones are banned throughout the school day in 18 states and the District of Columbia, although Georgia and Florida impose “bell-to-bell” bans only from kindergarten through eighth grade. Another seven states ban them during class time, but not between classes or during lunch. Still others, particularly those with traditions of local school control, mandate only a cellphone policy, believing districts will take the hint and sharply restrict phone access.
Under the Wisconsin bill, all public schools are required to adopt a policy prohibiting the use of cellphones during instructional time by July 1. There would be exceptions including for use during an emergency or perceived threat; to manage a student’s health care; if use of the phone is allowed under the student’s individualized education program; or if written by a teacher for educational purposes.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
For the last few days, I’ve been in Boone, N.C., for the kickoff conference of the Rural Talent Lab. The conference has been terrific, with thoughtful presentations and a chance to reconnect with some folks I hadn’t seen in a while. I’m still processing much of what I heard, but one line in particular jumped out at me.
The presentation was about offering programs in the trades for students in rural locations. Addressing the frequent shortage of instructors in high-demand fields, one speaker—my notes betray me, so I don’t know who—mentioned that “we’re in the golden age of retirement, with baby boomers hitting age 65 every day.” He (I think) went on to say that if colleges were to approach companies with the suggestion of having them incorporate some teaching into employees’ final years before retirement, it could act as a combination of a glide path to retirement and a way to get well-qualified and experienced people as instructors.
I read once that the sign of a great idea is that as soon as you hear it, you wonder why you hadn’t thought of it. This one passes that test.
The areas in which this would make the most sense in the short term are the trades: HVAC, welding, plumbing and the like. These fields combine technical know-how with the ability to handle real situations in the field. It’s one thing to know how to fix a pipe; it’s another to know how to handle a cantankerous homeowner or business manager who accuses you of ripping them off. That’s where an instructor with long experience in the field can bring an added dimension.
An arrangement like this could make sense for the instructors, too, given the physical demands of these jobs. As they get older, the prospect of spending less time bending themselves into tight spots or fighting metal and more time teaching might hold some appeal. When I taught at DeVry in the late ’90s, I had a fair number of students in their 40s who were switching careers from construction to computer repair; nearly all of them mentioned back and knee injuries and general physical wear and tear as motivators. It’s not difficult to imagine that someone in a field like these, approaching retirement, might want to give their knees and backs an easier assignment. Teaching isn’t an easy task to do well, but its physical demands tend to be more modest.
For the employers, I could imagine a couple of upsides. For one, they might be able to hold on to good employees a little longer if those employees could intersperse teaching with their usual work. Secondly, they’d ensure a continued pipeline of new tradespeople coming in. It’s no secret that many skilled trades are facing a retirement cliff, since they largely skipped a generation. They need newbies.
For colleges, the upside would be having experienced professionals with industry contacts in high-demand fields. Yes, there would have to be some professional development in teaching techniques and dealing with common student issues. But stepping up our mentoring game is a good idea anyway—if this is the motivation to do that, so be it.
Wise and worldly readers, have you seen this tried at scale? If so, are there any hard-won lessons you could share? As always, I’m at deandad (at) gmail (dot) com.
For early-career researchers (ECRs), building a digital research space can feel like another burden piled onto an already demanding schedule. The idea of online professional networking often evokes images of overwhelming social media feeds and self-promoting influencers.
Yet ECRs face a significant risk by solely relying on institutional platforms for their digital footprint: information portability. While university websites offer high visibility as trusted sources, most ECRs on short-term contracts lose web and email access as soon as their contracts expire. This often forces a hasty rebuild of their online presence precisely when they need to navigate critical career transitions.
Having worked with doctoral and postdoctoral candidates across Europe, common initial hesitations to establishing a digital research space include: uncertainty about how and where to start, discouragement from senior researchers who dismiss digital networks as not “real” work, fears of appearing boastful and/or the paralyzing grip of impostor syndrome. Understanding these hesitations, I emphasize in my coaching the ways that building a digital research space is a natural extension of ECRs’ professional growth.
Why a Strategic Digital Research Space Matters
A proactive, professional digital strategy offers several key advantages.
Enhancing visibility and discoverability: A well-curated, current, consistent and coherent digital presence significantly improves discoverability for peers, potential collaborators, future employers, funders, journal editors and the media.
Networking: Strategically using digital platforms transcends institutional and geographical boundaries, enabling connections with specific individuals, research groups and relevant industry contacts globally.
Showcasing expertise and impact: Your digital space allows you to present a holistic view of your contributions beyond publications, including skills, ongoing projects, presentations, teaching, outreach and broader impacts.
Meeting communication expectations: As research advances, particularly with public funding, the demand to communicate findings beyond academic circles increases. Funders, institutions and the public expect researchers to demonstrate broader impact and societal relevance and a strategic digital presence provides effective channels for these crucial communications.
Controlling your narrative: Actively shape your professional identity and how your expertise is perceived, rather than relying on fragmented institutional profiles or database entries.
Ensuring information portability and longevity: Platforms like LinkedIn, ORCID, Google Scholar or a personal website ensure your professional identity, network and achievements remain consistent, accessible and under your control throughout your career.
Getting Started: Choosing Your Digital Network Combination
The goal isn’t to be online everywhere, but to be online strategically. Select a platform combination and engagement style aligned with your specific objectives and target audience, considering the time you have available.
Different platforms serve distinct strategic aims and audiences at various research stages. Categorizing digital platforms into three subspaces helps map the landscape and can help you develop a more balanced presence across the research cycle.
First, identify the primary strategic goal(s): public dissemination, professional networking expansion or deeper engagement within your academic niche? Your answer will guide your platform selection, as you aim for eventual presence in each space.
Figure 1: Align your digital platform choices with your strategic goals and target audience.
Next, consider your audience spectrum. Effective research communication depends on understanding your target audience and their needs.
Scholarly discourse: At the outset of your career, specialized academic platforms like ResearchGate, Academia.edu, institutional repositories and reference managers with social features (e.g., Mendeley) are key for engaging directly with peers. Foundational permanent identifiers like ORCID are crucial for tracking outputs across systems.
Professional network: As you seek to develop your career, LinkedIn, Google (including Google Scholar) and X (formerly Twitter) are vital hubs across academia, industry and related sectors.
Share for impact: TikTok, Facebook and Instagram excel for broader dissemination. Do adjust style and tone: While academics can process jargon and complex concepts, a broader audience will engage more in plain English.
A strong, time-efficient and pragmatic starting point is to create a free and unique researcher identifier number like an ORCID, develop a professional LinkedIn profile and engage with a relevant academic platform (this would be in addition to your presence on a university or lab website). Because the ORCID requires no upkeep and a LinkedIn profile can leverage existing institutional and biographical information, with this combination ECRs can quickly establish a solid foundation for gradual digital expansion over the medium term.
Make It Manageable: Time, Engagement and Content
Once the platform combination is in place, effective digital management requires balancing three core elements: time, engagement and content.
Figure 2. Key considerations for a sustainable digital networking strategy: balancing realistic time investment, meaningful engagement and appropriate content types.
Time Investment
Key message: Prioritize consistency over quantity.
Focused engagement: Allocate short, regular blocks (e.g., 15 to 30 minutes weekly) for specific activities like checking discussions, sharing updates or thoughtful commenting between periods of focused research.
Platform nuance: Invest strategically, recognizing that platforms have different tempos and life spans (e.g., a LinkedIn post typically has a longer life span than an X post).
Campaign bursts: Plan ahead to strategically increase activity around key events like publications or conferences, utilizing scheduling tools for automated posting.
Content cadence: Consistency beats constant noise, so plan a realistic posting schedule such as once a month.
Engagement
Key message: Focus on short but regular efforts.
Active participation: Move beyond passive consumption by commenting, sharing relevant work and asking insightful questions.
Build relationships: Genuine interaction fosters trust and meaningful connections.
Monitor your impact (optional): Use platform analytics to understand what resonates and refine your strategy.
Content Type
Key message: Your hard work should work hard online.
Written: Summaries, insights, blog posts, threads, articles.
Visual: Infographics, diagrams, cleared research images, presentation slides.
Multimedia: Short explanatory videos, audio clips, recorded talks.
Cross-post: Share content across all relevant platforms (e.g., post your YouTube video on LinkedIn and ResearchGate).
Overcoming Reluctance
If you’re hesitant, consider these starting points:
Start small, stay focused: Choose one or two platforms aligned with your top priority. Master these before expanding.
Embrace learning: Your initial digital content may not be perfect, but consistent practice leads to significant improvement. Give yourself permission to progress.
Integrate, don’t isolate: Weave digital engagement into your research workflow. Share insights from webinars or interesting papers with your network.
Give and take: Focus on offering value by sharing insights, asking stimulating questions and amplifying others’ work. Reciprocity fuels networking.
Set boundaries: Protect your deep work time. Schedule dedicated slots for digital engagement during lower-energy periods and manage notifications wisely.
Be patient: Recognize that building meaningful networks and visibility is a long-term career investment.
Your Digital Research Space: A Career Asset
A strategic digital research space is essential for navigating and succeeding in a modern research career. A thoughtful approach empowers you to control your professional narrative, build lasting networks, meet communication expectations and ensure your valuable contributions are both visible and portable.
Maura Hannon is based in Switzerland and has more than two decades of expertise in strategic communication and thought leadership positioning. She has worked extensively for the last 10 years with doctoral and postdoctoral candidates across Europe to help them build strategies that harness digital networks to enhance their research visibility and impact.
Funding for the Head Start program is set to expire on Saturday due to the ongoing government shutdown. It provides nearly 65,000 children in 41 states with education, care and nutrition. CBS News correspondent Nicole Valdes reports.
The year-long debate over who will pay for the pensions of non-teaching Chicago Public Schools employees ended after a tense, hours-long meeting where the Chicago Board of Education voted to agree to finance $175 million toward the payments.
In a unanimous vote, the board approved an intergovernmental agreement with the city in which it promises to pay an amount not to exceed $175 million for fiscal year 2026, effective Thursday until Dec. 31, 2026.
The decision comes after months of pressure on CPS to assume the payment from Mayor Brandon Johnson and some city council members. In August, the school board said it would only make the payment if it received additional funding from a tax increment financing surplus, beyond the $379 million it was already banking on in its $10.2 billion budget.
The board also voted to punt the decision of whether to close South Shore charter school EPIC Academy to its next special meeting on Nov. 4. EPIC’s board voted in September to shut down the school at the end of the academic year. The vote prompted a heated interchange between members as they debated the logistics of winding down the school’s operations and the students’ futures.
Pension payment
The additional funds from TIF districts – taxing areas around the city – and are intended for local development projects. When the TIFs expire or are declared to have surplus, meaning there are excess funds that are not obligated to specific projects, the money is disbursed across local government bodies. CPS receives a roughly 52% cut, while the city receives 23%.
The district’s approved budget stipulated that it would pay for the pensions, “contingent on additional revenue,” which must exceed the $379 million CPS counted on a TIF surplus.
However, those funds will not be secured until the city budget is passed, and the payment is expected to be made by CPS in two installments once the funding is received.
Multiple board members expressed concerns with the agreement but acknowledged that signing it indicates the district’s commitment to follow through on its August promise to pay the pensions if it received more funding.
Despite this year’s surplus, the question remains how the district and City Hall come to terms with a sustainable plan to fund Chicago Public Schools. “We need to have a longer conversation…among all of us on the board and also with the city to see what the long-term plan is regarding the reimbursement moving forward after this year,” board member Yesenia Lopez, District 7B said during the meeting.
Mayor Brandon Johnson’s budget proposal recommended a record TIF surplus of over $1 billion this year in its proposed city budget, with an estimated $552 million of that going to CPS, plus another $20.6 million set aside for its building improvement fund. Johnson’s budget must be approved by City Council by Dec. 31.
The CPS’s cut of the TIF surplus is expected to cover that $379 million gap in the district’s budget, $8 million in recently cut federal funding and at least part of the $175 million pension payment. Yet the expected $552 million TIF windfall leaves CPS $10 million short of covering its obligations.
It’s unclear who is left holding the bag because the pension payment is contingent upon the district using additional TIF dollars beyond the $379 million to cover the budget shortfall.
“If CPS doesn’t make the payment, or it doesn’t make the full payment, the city is left with whatever portion is remaining as gap for this fiscal year … and it will have to find some other way to fill that,” Civic Federation Policy & Research Associate Danny Vesecky told the Tribune.
The pension payment has been a point of contention for over a year, and played a part in the firing without cause of former district CEO Pedro Martinez. The city is legally responsible for the pensions, but in recent years has pushed for CPS to take over the payments.
In August, the majority of aldermen signed a letter committing to a substantial surplus to help CPS. But after the record-breaking sweep was proposed last week, both allies and opponents of Johnson have pushed back.
The money is intended to spur redevelopment across the city, and would affect 68 of the city’s 108 TIF districts, according to estimates from aldermen. Some expressed concerns that it will delay much-needed improvements in those neighborhoods, particularly on the South and West sides.
“Generally, TIF as a revenue source isn’t intended to be used for general operating purposes,” said Annie McGowan, a research and policy director at the Civic Federation.
Elected officials have increasingly relied on TIF money to solve Chicago’s budget woes — but it’s considered a temporary solution to structural deficits because it relies on one-time funds. In 2014, the city declared a TIF surplus of just $65 million. By 2025, the total surplus amount topped $570 million. CPS received $379 million, which accounted for 4% of its budget.
Uncertainty around EPIC lingers
Tension was also heightened around the future of EPIC Academy, which the board was slated to vote on Thursday but later tabled the decision. EPIC stakeholders have expressed concerns with their own future, including where staff and students will end up after the school closes in 2026.
The vote initially was to enact the closure of the school and provide it $1.4 million to help it wind down operations, but concerns grew after board member Aaron “Jitu” Brown, district 5A, motioned to amend the agenda item’s language. The amendment included plans to keep the school community together and create a wind-down plan alongside that community, among other points.
Multiple board members expressed frustration with being “surprised” by the amendment, which ultimately failed to be adopted.
“This feels like a gotcha. It feels like another us versus them. We’re not unifying as a whole board,” said Ellen Rosenfeld, District 4B. “…Why not share it early? I don’t understand.”
While acknowledging that to some board members the move felt last minute, member Michilla Blaise. District 5B added the nature of the situation speaks to the rapid uncertainty plaguing charter schools.
“As these charter schools seem to be closing, we just have to be ready, and we have to make sure that we’re doing our due diligence, that we’re keeping community informed, that we are talking with our labor partners…and we might have to do it a little more quickly than we have in the past,” Blaise said.
The anti-Israel encampments on the quad are mostly gone, but we’re starting to learn what happened behind the scenes when universities let antisemitism run rampant on campus. Records recently obtained from the University of Arizona show the school’s faculty threw in with pro-Palestinian protesters in the months after Oct. 7, 2023.
Arizona-based researcher Brian Anderson issued the Freedom of Information Act request in May 2024 for university communications on such keywords as “Israel,” “Palestine,” “Gaza,” “Hamas,” “Anti-Semitism” and “Jewish.” Mr. Anderson says the school refused the request until his lawyer sent a demand letter. It later produced nearly 1,000 documents with many names redacted. The university didn’t respond to our request for comment.
The emails reveal that on Oct. 11, 2023, then-Arizona President Robert Robbins issued an unequivocal statement addressing “the horrendous acts of terrorism by Hamas in Israel.” Mr. Robbins called the massacre “antisemitic hatred, murder, and a complete atrocity” and called out Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) for “endorsing the actions of Hamas.”
For that moment of principled clarity, Mr. Robbins was criticized by the faculty. On Oct. 12, faculty chair Leila Hudson received an email from a professor (name redacted) who expressed “concern” that “President Robbins email and others’ smears are chilling SJP dissent.” (Mr. Robbins had noted that while SJP didn’t speak for the university, the group has “the constitutional right to hold their views and to express them in a safe environment.”)
For the second time this year, Denver Public Schools board members on Wednesday took John Youngquist to task for his behavior toward district staff, but the director was defiant in the face of his colleagues’ criticism as he reiterated his belief that district employees are retaliating against him.
Youngquist called the allegations of racism and creating a hostile work environment made by Superintendent Alex Marrero and other district staff in recent months an attempt to “intimidate and diminish me.”
“It has become clear certain members of the board and district leadership have attempted to impeach my credibility,” he said during Wednesday’s board meeting.
School board members called the meeting to discuss the results of a third-party investigation that found Youngquist displayed “belittling, dismissive and condescending behavior” toward DPS staff. As directors weighed in on the findings, which were released Monday, they called for a moment of reflection, but did not say what action they might take in response to the report.
John Youngquist, right, looks at Superintendent Alex Marrero as he speaks with the board during a special Denver Public Schools board meeting on Oct. 29, 2025. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)
Directors are considering whether to censure — or formally rebuke — Youngquist and plan to continue the conversation during a Nov. 13 meeting, which could result in such a vote.
“There’s definitely something that’s not working well in board interactions with staff, so we would want to talk about what would be next steps,” board President Carrie Olson said. “…This is something we don’t want to rush.”
The investigation was conducted by attorneys with the Denver-based firm Garnett Powell Maximon Barlow and Farbes, which the board hired to look into Marrero’s allegations.
In the spring, Marrero accused Youngquist of hostile behavior toward DPS employees — especially staff of color — and of wanting his job, in an email sent to Olson. Marrero, in his email, requested that the board take the rare step of censuring Youngquist for his actions.
A censure is the strongest step the school board can take to formally reprimand a colleague. The board does not have the authority to remove a member.
A DPS board last censured a member in 2021 after a third-party investigation found former director Auon’tai Anderson flirted online with a teenage student and made intimidating social media posts.
Wednesday’s meeting was the second time in 10 months that school board members have publicly scolded Youngquist for his behavior toward staff. While recent DPS boards have become known for infighting in recent years, they rarely air grievances openly as they did during the meeting.
“This is concerning repetitive behavior that may or may not change,” board member Xóchitl Gaytán said of the investigation’s findings. “I’m still working through the findings of the report. Thinking about how I want to deconstruct the white privilege that I read in it and how it is playing out.”
Staff, most of whom are people of color, told investigators that Youngquist cuts them off in conversations, has refused to shake hands and declines to meet with them. Employees said Youngquist questions them to such an extent that it appears the director believes they are lying or incapable of doing their jobs, according to the report.
“We conclude it is more likely than not that Mr. Youngquist exhibited bias in interactions with some district leaders of color,” investigators wrote in their findings.
Director Michelle Quattlebaum, right, speaks during a special Denver Public Schools board meeting to discuss a third-party investigation into Superintendent Alex Marrero’s allegations against Director John Youngquist, in Denver on Oct. 29, 2025. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)
In his statement to the board, Youngquist, a white man, emphasized the investigation did not determine his behavior was driven by overt racism — even as it also found that his actions were the result of biases, including when interacting with employees of color.
“I hold biases as each and every one of us,” Youngquist said. “Our biases may or may not be represented in our behavior.”
Youngquist’s comments fell short of the accountability that several of his colleagues said they were seeking from him, and spurred board member Michelle Quattlebaum, who is Black, to tears.
“I am heartbroken,” she said. “I have experienced racism, discrimination and oppression almost every single day of my life. Mr. Youngquist, as I listen to your statement, my heart broke.”
“What breaks my heart is that I didn’t hear accountability,” Quattlebaum added.
Gaytán and Marlene De La Rosa — the other two directors of color on the board — pressed Youngquist on what they also said was a lack of accountability in his statement.
“I feel disappointed,” De La Rosa told Youngquist. “…I thought I knew you to be a different person than that. If we don’t take accountability when we do things that harm people, that hurts their feelings, that make them feel a certain way, we cannot move forward to reach our goals as a collective board.”
Youngquist responded by saying that he has previously reached out individually to district staffers whom he has offended. “Blanket level of accountability is not something that makes sense to me,” he said.
Durham Public Schools is the latest district in the area to weigh revisions to its cellphone policy to align with a new state law.
School leaders Thursday will review changes that would require middle and high school students to power off their
phones instead of just silencing them. The new policy also has two options to either
prohibit smart glasses altogether, or they only be used as prescription glasses
with technology turned off.
Wake County Public Schools is also considering making changes to align with the law. The current policy says cellphones can be kept in silent mode.
Wake school leaders are also considering amending the policy to ensure students can still bring personal laptops to school, so long as they’re used for instructional purposes. That has been a point of confusion, with some believing the policy did not allow personal laptops at all.
The Wake school board plans to approve the changes by the end of the year.
Earlier this year, the school board approved a standalone cellphone policy that drastically restricted their use, after years of schools establishing their own rules and enforcing them differently.
WRAL News reported earlier this year that different approaches to enforcement yielded different successes.
This summer, state lawmakers passed House Bill 959, which requires school boards across the state to approve policies restricting the use of cellphones and other communication devices and to establish consequences for people who violate those policies.
The push came as states and schools across the country were responding to concerns about device addiction among young people and concerns that devices were disrupting learning.
Some research has suggested that some policies can effectively curb device use. One recent study found modest academic gains two years after schools implemented a strict policy, but saw more students suspended when policies were strictest.
The government has been shut down for a month and Congress remains locked in a stalemate. Students are going hungry, veterans have been deserted and vital research has been left in the lurch. The longer the shutdown drags on, the more harm it will do to higher education.
Most urgently, the USDA will not use emergency funds to help cover the costs of the Supplement Nutrition Assistance Program. More than a million college students who rely on SNAP for their basic needs won’t have that support starting Saturday. Mark Huelsman, the director of policy and advocacy at the Hope Center for Student Basic Needs, said the situation will force students and colleges into “an impossible situation” and could lead to many students dropping out.
The crisis extends beyond food insecurity into student support programs, with the shutdown throwing veterans’ education into limbo. Nobody is answering the GI Bill hotline that thousands of veterans use each month to get information on tuition, eligibility and housing allowances. Staff at Veterans Affairs regional offices are furloughed, putting an end to career counseling and delaying GI Bill claims.
As direct services to students falter, colleges are moving into mitigation mode. Gap funds, meant to serve institutions in these circumstances, are dwindling. Inside Higher Edreported last week that institutions are limiting travel, research and job offers in order to preserve cash while hundreds of millions in research funds are on pause. A training program funded by a grant from the Labor Department is on hold because a federal program officer isn’t at work to approve the next tranche of cash.
Ironically, part of Democrats’ resistance to reopening the government is serving to protect higher ed funding. Democrats are trying to prevent Republicans from clawing back approved funding through the rescissions process, like they did this summer with grants to public broadcasting and USAID. The risk to education funds that don’t align with the White House’s priorities is real. In a potentially illegal move of impoundment, the Department of Education has canceled or rejected funding for at least 100 TRIO programs affecting more than 43,000 disadvantaged students. Last month it reallocated $132 million in funds away from minority-serving institutions to historically Black colleges and universities and tribal colleges.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration—never one to let a good crisis go to waste—is using the shutdown to further gut the Education Department. Most of the department has been furloughed, and 10 days into the shutdown the administration fired nearly 500 more Education Department staff. A federal judge indefinitely blocked the layoffs this week, but the administration will likely challenge the ruling. If the cuts happen, the department will have fewer than half the employees it started with in January. The offices that handle civil rights complaints, TRIO funding and special education will be decimated.
The staff cuts set the stage for Education Secretary Linda McMahon to reiterate her plans to shutter the department. In a post on X two weeks into the shutdown, she said the fact that millions of American students are still going to school, teachers are getting paid and schools are operating as normal during the shutdown “confirms what the President has said: the federal Department of Education is unnecessary, and we should return education to the states.”
“The Department has taken additional steps to better reach American students and families and root out the education bureaucracy that has burdened states and educators with unnecessary oversight,” she added.
Policy experts predict the shutdown will end around mid-November, when enough people feel the pain of not getting a paycheck and start to complain to their senators and representatives. But colleges won’t pick up where they left off. A significant pause in funding derails education journeys for disadvantaged students and throttles valuable scientific research. Subject matter expertise and human resources will be lost through Education Department staffing cuts. Already on the defense after nearly a year of attacks on DEI, academic freedom and research funding by the administration, higher ed will struggle to recover from yet another blow.
LAKELAND, Fla. — Students at Lakeland High School are getting a head start in pursuing a career in education thanks to a partnership with Florida Southern College. It is creating a pathway for students to earn credits while in high school.
The academy is made up of 55 high school students who are interested in pursuing a career in education
The academy is four years long and will help students transfer to FSC with five college course credits.
Students in this classroom are putting pen to paper learning about a career in education.
Ashlynn Masciarelli is a sophomore at Lakeland High School who is interested in working in the classroom. “I have a lot of family members that are teachers, and I’ve always been a big helper, and I love kids,” she said.
She is part of over 50 students at the high school taking part in the “Educator Academy.” It’s a new partnership with Florida Southern College geared toward high school students.
Faith Himene said it is teaching her valuable skills as she considers becoming a special needs educator.
“I’ve learned a lot of relationship ways to work with kids and how to communicate with parents and adults,” Himene said.
The course is taught by college students currently enrolled in the education school at FSC.
The dean of the school of education, Lori Rakes, said the academy will guide students over the course of four years. At the end, they will earn five class credits that can transfer to the college.
“Currently there are three classes in the educator academy, different periods of the day,” Rakes said. “As the program grows, we hope that it will take all seven class periods.”
The academy includes partnership days where FSC students come in to teach the high schoolers. They also shadow college students at FSC and even get hands-on training at the Roberts Academy.
Tracey Tedder, the provost and VP of Academic Affairs with the college, hopes this will create a pipeline for more teachers in the county.
“There’s a need for teachers right here in our own community, and it gave us a great opportunity to not only work with our local community but to prepare students who are interested in education,” Tedder said.
And inspire students like Masciarelli and Himene to one day be in their own classrooms.
The academy is made up of students of all grade levels. Students interested in taking part can sign up at Lakeland High School.
Erika Kirk walked onto the stage at the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss) Wednesday night to a packed house for her first Turning Point USA campus appearance since the murder of her husband, Charlie Kirk.
“It’s hard not to cry after watching,” she said of the video tribute that played before she took the microphone. “I haven’t seen that… that video since that day happened.”
“Being on campus right now for me is a spiritual reclaiming of territory,” she said. “There is a lot of symbolism in today. It’s Wednesday, seven weeks. And the more that I am coming to grips with the permanency of this nightmare, the more that I am starting to realize and witness that the enemy, he doesn’t want you.”
He wants your territory. He wants your influence. And I could just hear Charlie in my heart. I could hear him say, ‘Go reclaim that territory, babe. Go — the battles that God’s love conquers.’ And that’s why I’m here today,” she added.
Erika Kirk speaks during a “This Is the Turning Point” campus tour event at the University of Mississippi, in Oxford, Miss., Wednesday.(AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
Erika thanked the students who filled the arena, many wearing ‘Freedom’ T-shirts like the one she wore at the podium. “You have no idea how helpful it is to have all of you in my life, because you help me feel even more deeply connected to my husband,” she told them.
She recalled how Charlie made a point at every Turning Point USA event to stop and talk with student leaders. “He would ask you what your name is, what you’re studying, what issues are going on on campus,” she said. “He wanted you to know he was investing in you: into your chapter, into your school. That was a pulse point for him.”
“Earn your voice,” she urged. “You are the courageous generation. That’s what you are. All of you, Gen Z, you are the courageous generation. Make him proud.”
Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, speaks during a Turning Point USA event where Vice President JD Vance also spoke at the University of Mississippi, in Oxford, Miss., Wednesday.(Jonathan Ernst/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
“I lost my friend. I lost my best friend,” she said. “If you’re nervous about standing up for the truth, the murder of my husband puts into perspective all those fears. My husband never went with the flow. He believed the harder path was always the right one, because comfort doesn’t change the world.”
She shared for the first time with the audience present that for weeks after Charlie’s murder she avoided their bedroom at home.
“It took me a while to even just make it back into our bedroom,” she said. “I used to sprint from the opening door into the bathroom and sprint out. I was not ready to walk into our bedroom yet, and when I was finally able to sleep in our bed for the first time, I slept on his side of the bed.”
Attendees listen as Vice President JD Vance speaks during a “This Is the Turning Point” campus tour event at Ole Miss, in Oxford, Miss., Wednesday.(AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
From that spot, she said, she finally saw what Charlie saw every morning, the framed words on the wall: “They will be known by the boldness of their faith.”
“He saw that every single morning he woke up,” Erika said. “I didn’t, because I was on the other side, facing the window. But from his side, that’s what he saw first.”
On his desk, she added, were three questions Charlie had written out and asked himself each day: “What is something I can do for someone today? What is something I can do to add value to the world today? How can I honor God today?”
“Those were his action points for courage,” Erika said. “Ask yourself those questions every day, and I promise you, you will get courage. What death amplifies even more is that you only get one life. So live like it matters.”
“Love your family fearlessly. Love your spouse fearlessly. Love this country,” she said. “Defend her and serve our God. And don’t think that it’s someone else’s role to do it. You do it. You do it.” The audience broke into applause.
“This moment can either be your breaking point or your wake-up call,” she said. “Essentially, your turning point.”
She then introduced Vice President JD Vance, a friend of her late husband, calling him someone who “understands the fight that we’re up against and can articulate that in a way that transcends race and background.”
“There will never be another Charlie,” she said, “but I know he’d be proud to see us here tonight.”
Jasmine Baehr is a Breaking News Writer for Fox News Digital, where she covers politics, the military, faith and culture.
A cash-strapped school district that’s looking to unload a shuttered elementary school.
A nonprofit human services agency that’s in need of a bigger home as it serves more than 60,000 households a year.
And a judge who’s telling Colorado’s fifth-largest city not to make any moves on the whole situation — a complex deal that would allow the agency to move into the school — until she can determine whether everything is on the up and up.
That’s the strange nexus at which Lakewood, Jeffco Public Schools and The Action Center have found themselves after their proposed real estate deal was challenged in court by a former Lakewood city councilwoman who thinks the whole arrangement is “taking place in secret.”
“Government should have to do this in a way that’s transparent and above board — and includes the public in this kind of decision-making,” said Anita Springsteen, who’s also an attorney. “I think it’s unethical. I think it’s wrong.”
The deal on the table calls for Lakewood to purchase Emory Elementary — which closed three years ago because of declining enrollment — from Jeffco Public Schools for $4 million. At the same time, the city would buy The Action Center’s existing facility on West 14th Avenue for $4 million.
The Action Center, in turn, would buy Emory from the city for $1 million when the organization, which for more than a half-century has provided free clothing and food, family services and financial assistance to those in need, moves to its new home in the former school on South Teller Street.
The core problem, Springsteen says, is that Lakewood did not properly announce two September 2024 executive sessions during which officials discussed details of the deal in private. In a lawsuit, she accused the city of violating Colorado’s open meetings law, which requires governments to state, in advance and “in as much detail as possible,” what will be discussed behind closed doors “without compromising the purpose for the executive session.”
Jefferson County District Judge Meegan Miloud had enough questions last week about how Lakewood gave public notice of its executive sessions that she imposed a temporary restraining order on the City Council — forbidding it from voting on three ordinances that would authorize the deal to move forward.
The council had been scheduled to consider the measures Monday night.
Miloud said the city’s executive session notices on the council’s September 2024 agendas were “so vague that the public has no way of identifying or discerning what is being negotiated or what property is being assessed.”
On Tuesday morning, the judge conducted a hearing on the matter but did not make a ruling. She called another hearing for next Monday and said in a new order that her injunction remains in effect.
The fast-moving situation has Lakewood playing defense. A special council meeting that had been set for Wednesday night — to once again put the ordinances up for a council vote — will now have to be rescheduled, city spokeswoman Stacie Oulton said.
Lakewood, she contended, has been open throughout the process.
“The public process has included updates from the city manager during public City Council meetings, and the city has followed the public notification process for these agenda items,” she told The Denver Post in an email this week. “Additionally, the proposed end user of the property, the Action Center, has had several public community meetings about its proposal.”
Anita Springsteen, a lawyer and former Lakewood city councilwoman, is leading a challenge to a complex land deal between the City of Lakewood, Jeffco Public Schools and The Action Center that would bring the humans services nonprofit to the former Emory Elementary School in Lakewood on Oct. 28, 2025. She posed for a portrait outside the former school. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)
Questions about meetings, market value
Jeff Roberts, the executive director of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, said it was “unusual” for a judge, via a temporary restraining order, to preempt a city council from casting a vote.
But case law, he said, makes it clear that governing bodies in Colorado must provide as much detail as possible when they announce closed-door sessions — short of disclosing or jeopardizing strategies and positions that are crucial in real estate negotiations.
“In general, an announcement that doesn’t give any indication of the topic is not enough information for the public,” Roberts said. “In most cases — and that’s why it’s in the law — you must tell the public what the executive session is about.”
That standard, he said, was upheld by the Colorado Court of Appeals in 2020, when it ruled that the Basalt Town Council violated the state’s open meetings law several times in 2016 by not properly announcing the topic of private deliberations it would be having regarding a former town manager.
In the Lakewood school matter, the alleged open meetings violations are not the only thing that bothers Springsteen. She objects to the structure of the proposed real estate transaction, saying it would be a sweetheart deal for The Action Center and a waste of money for taxpayers.
“They are stealing money out of our pockets,” said Springsteen, who served on City Council from 2019 to 2023.
Lakewood, she said, would be underpaying for the 17-acre Emory Elementary School parcel, overpaying for The Action Center’s current facility and basically giving the school property away to the nonprofit.
“For the city to not intend to own the property, but to buy it on behalf of a nongovernmental organization — when did we become an agent for other agencies?” Springsteen said.
According to the Jefferson County assessor’s site, The Action Center’s buildings on West 14th Avenue have a total value of about $2 million, while the city has proposed purchasing them for double that. The assessor’s office lists Emory Elementary as having a total value of up to $12 million.
Springsteen said she is flummoxed by the Jeffco school district’s willingness to sell the elementary school to Lakewood for a third of that valuation.
“What bothers me most is the way Jeffco schools is handling this,” she said. “The district didn’t even have a school resource officer at Evergreen High School because of budgetary issues.”
A spokesperson for Jeffco schools said a decision on whether to sell Emory Elementary to Lakewood hadn’t been made yet. That vote, by the district’s school board, is expected Nov. 13.
Raven Price picks out food at The Action Center’s food bank in Lakewood on Oct. 28, 2025. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)
‘We need to bring this into our community’
Pam Brier, the CEO of The Action Center, said property values don’t tell the full story.
“There are many instances locally and nationally of municipalities helping to support the affordable acquisition of properties for organizations like The Action Center — who are serving such a critical need in our community,” she said, “and ultimately saving taxpayer money by helping to meet people’s basic needs.”
On Wednesday, she provided The Denver Post a May 2024 appraisal done by Centennial-based Masters Valuation Services that valued the organization’s current facility — made up of a 14,960-square-foot building and a 15,540-square-foot building — at $4 million.
Her organization, Brier said, serves 300 households a day. It provides a free grocery and clothing market, financial assistance, free meals, family coaching, skills classes and workforce support to people who are down on their luck.
“As public dollars dwindle, our work is more important than ever,” she said. “Without organizations like The Action Center to provide food, clothing and other critical support, individuals and families fall into crisis, needing assistance that will cost taxpayers and cities so much more.”
Oulton, the Lakewood city spokeswoman, said it was not unusual for cities and counties across metro Denver to “provide financial support in a variety of ways to nonprofits that serve their communities.”
“Additionally, Jeffco Public Schools has clearly communicated to the city that the district views the value of this project in more than the dollars involved, because the district’s priority has been to see former schools used in a way that will continue providing services and support to Jeffco Public Schools students and their families,” Oulton said.
Diana Losacco, a 48-year resident of Lakewood who lives about a mile from the Emory site, was one of more than three dozen people who urged the city to pursue the purchase and sale of the school to The Action Center on the Lakewood Speaks website.
Raven Price and her 4-year-old son, Gabriel Luna, head home with a wagon full of food they selected from The Action Center’s food bank in Lakewood on Oct. 28, 2025. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)
“This will provide opportunities to people to become self-sufficient, which will provide significant financial savings for our community,” Losacco told The Post in an interview. “We need to bring this into our community. It needs to be in a neighborhood.”
But not her neighborhood, said Katherine Byrne. Byrne has owned Stockton Pet Hospital on South Wadsworth Boulevard for six years. The business, which was founded in 1964, sits just a few hundred feet west of Emory Elementary.
There are enough challenges with assaults, shots fired and drug dealing in the vicinity, especially along the nearby bike path, Byrne said. Because The Action Center won’t be providing overnight shelter space at its new location for people who are homeless, she worries about where people using the organization’s services might go once the doors close.
And she wonders why the city didn’t look at wealthier areas of Lakewood for potential sites to relocate The Action Center.
“It’s just a ridiculous, unsavory plan to put this center in the middle of a neighborhood that didn’t know it was coming,” Byrne said.
A 12-hour documentary series centered on the United States’ war for independence is premiering on PBS in November. Co-directors Ken Burns and Sarah Botstein join “The Takeout” to discuss what went into making “The American Revolution” and what they discovered in the process.
Deciding when to start childcare is one of the first big choices new parents make, and it often comes with a mix of excitement and questions. Is my baby ready? Will they adjust? What’s the right age to begin?
The truth is, every family’s journey looks different. Whether you’re returning to work or seeking a nurturing environment where your little one can grow, finding a trusted center close to home makes all the difference. That’s why families across the Upstate are excited to welcome Lightbridge Academy, opening soon in Greenville.
Special thanks to Lightbridge Academy for sponsoring this article.
A Gentle Start for Growing Families
The early months and years of a child’s life are full of change and discovery. During this time, children thrive in environments that are both safe and stimulating – places where they can explore, bond, and feel loved. At Lightbridge Academy, caregivers understand that every child’s readiness is unique. From infancy onward, teachers follow individualized routines that mirror home life, helping little ones adjust comfortably and confidently.
Families who begin care earlier often find comfort knowing their babies are surrounded by caring professionals who provide:
Consistent routines that create a sense of security
Gentle social interaction to encourage early communication
Sensory-based play that supports healthy brain development
Loving guidance that helps children grow at their own pace
What Sets Lightbridge Academy Apart
Choosing childcare means finding more than a place – it means finding a partnership. Lightbridge Academy is built around the Circle of Care, a philosophy that values the needs of everyone involved: children, parents, teachers, owners, and the community. It’s a true partnership that feels like an extension of your own family.
Here’s what families can expect when they walk through the doors:
Nurturing, trained educators who understand early childhood development
Bright, secure classrooms designed for comfort and exploration
Learning through play, guided by the Seedlings Early Childhood Curriculum
Ongoing family communication through the ParentView® app, with real-time updates, photos, and milestones
A Whole-Child Approach
Every Lightbridge Academy program – from infant care through pre-K is designed to nurture the whole child. This means blending academic readiness with emotional, social, and physical growth. Through songs, stories, and age-appropriate activities, children build curiosity, confidence, and compassion.
Families stay connected and engaged through the ParentView® app, which helps parents share in the milestones that make each day special.
Bringing the Circle of Care to Greenville
Founded in 1997, Lightbridge Academy has grown into one of the nation’s most trusted early education communities. Now, Greenville families can experience that same warmth and quality care right here in the Upstate. The new location will bring together everything parents love about Lightbridge – a balance of structure and play, learning and love, communication and community.
Your Family’s Next Chapter Starts Here
There’s no perfect age to start daycare — just the right time for your family. When that moment comes, Lightbridge Academy is ready to welcome you with open arms, providing a safe, joyful, and loving environment for your child’s growth.
Enrollment is now open for all age groups! Keep an eye out for the Lightbridge team at local events, or visit https://lightbridgeacademy.com/greenville-sc/ to learn more and schedule your tour.
In the growing conversation around AI in education, speed and efficiency often take center stage, but that focus can tempt busy educators to use what’s fast rather than what’s best. To truly serve teachers–and above all, students–AI must be built with intention and clear constraints that prioritize instructional quality, ensuring efficiency never comes at the expense of what learners need most.
AI doesn’t inherently understand fairness, instructional nuance, or educational standards. It mirrors its training and guidance, usually as a capable generalist rather than a specialist. Without deliberate design, AI can produce content that’s misaligned or confusing. In education, fairness means an assessment measures only the intended skill and does so comparably for students from different backgrounds, languages, and abilities–without hidden barriers unrelated to what’s being assessed. Effective AI systems in schools need embedded controls to avoid construct‑irrelevant content: elements that distract from what’s actually being measured.
For example, a math question shouldn’t hinge on dense prose, niche sports knowledge, or culturally-specific idioms unless those are part of the goal; visuals shouldn’t rely on low-contrast colors that are hard to see; audio shouldn’t assume a single accent; and timing shouldn’t penalize students if speed isn’t the construct.
To improve fairness and accuracy in assessments:
Avoid construct-irrelevant content: Ensure test questions focus only on the skills and knowledge being assessed.
Use AI tools with built-in fairness controls: Generic AI models may not inherently understand fairness; choose tools designed specifically for educational contexts.
Train AI on expert-authored content: AI is only as fair and accurate as the data and expertise it’s trained on. Use models built with input from experienced educators and psychometricians.
These subtleties matter. General-purpose AI tools, left untuned, often miss them.
The risk of relying on convenience
Educators face immense time pressures. It’s tempting to use AI to quickly generate assessments or learning materials. But speed can obscure deeper issues. A question might look fine on the surface but fail to meet cognitive complexity standards or align with curriculum goals. These aren’t always easy problems to spot, but they can impact student learning.
To choose the right AI tools:
Select domain-specific AI over general models: Tools tailored for education are more likely to produce pedagogically-sound and standards-aligned content that empowers students to succeed. In a 2024 University of Pennsylvania study, students using a customized AI tutor scored 127 percent higher on practice problems than those without.
Be cautious with out-of-the-box AI: Without expertise, educators may struggle to critique or validate AI-generated content, risking poor-quality assessments.
Understand the limitations of general AI: While capable of generating content, general models may lack depth in educational theory and assessment design.
General AI tools can get you 60 percent of the way there. But that last 40 percent is the part that ensures quality, fairness, and educational value. This requires expertise to get right. That’s where structured, guided AI becomes essential.
Building AI that thinks like an educator
Developing AI for education requires close collaboration with psychometricians and subject matter experts to shape how the system behaves. This helps ensure it produces content that’s not just technically correct, but pedagogically sound.
To ensure quality in AI-generated content:
Involve experts in the development process: Psychometricians and educators should review AI outputs to ensure alignment with learning goals and standards.
Use manual review cycles: Unlike benchmark-driven models, educational AI requires human evaluation to validate quality and relevance.
Focus on cognitive complexity: Design assessments with varied difficulty levels and ensure they measure intended constructs.
This process is iterative and manual. It’s grounded in real-world educational standards, not just benchmark scores.
Personalization needs structure
AI’s ability to personalize learning is promising. But without structure, personalization can lead students off track. AI might guide learners toward content that’s irrelevant or misaligned with their goals. That’s why personalization must be paired with oversight and intentional design.
To harness personalization responsibly:
Let experts set goals and guardrails: Define standards, scope and sequence, and success criteria; AI adapts within those boundaries.
Use AI for diagnostics and drafting, not decisions: Have it flag gaps, suggest resources, and generate practice, while educators curate and approve.
Preserve curricular coherence: Keep prerequisites, spacing, and transfer in view so learners don’t drift into content that’s engaging but misaligned.
Support educator literacy in AI: Professional development is key to helping teachers use AI effectively and responsibly.
It’s not enough to adapt–the adaptation must be meaningful and educationally coherent.
AI can accelerate content creation and internal workflows. But speed alone isn’t a virtue. Without scrutiny, fast outputs can compromise quality.
To maintain efficiency and innovation:
Use AI to streamline internal processes: Beyond student-facing tools, AI can help educators and institutions build resources faster and more efficiently.
Maintain high standards despite automation: Even as AI accelerates content creation, human oversight is essential to uphold educational quality.
Responsible use of AI requires processes that ensure every AI-generated item is part of a system designed to uphold educational integrity.
An effective approach to AI in education is driven by concern–not fear, but responsibility. Educators are doing their best under challenging conditions, and the goal should be building AI tools that support their work.
When frameworks and safeguards are built-in, what reaches students is more likely to be accurate, fair, and aligned with learning goals.
In education, trust is foundational. And trust in AI starts with thoughtful design, expert oversight, and a deep respect for the work educators do every day.
Nick Koprowicz, Prometric
Nick Koprowicz is an applied AI scientist at Prometric, a global leader in credentialing and skills development.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
FIRST ON FOX: Dozens of parental rights organizations have signed onto a letter sent to all 50 states calling for top-to-bottom statewide audits of education laws and policies warning that DEI, poor hiring practices, and discrimination based on sex and gender continues to be prevalent in K-12 schools nationwide.
The letter, sent by Defending Education along with over 20 other parental rights in education groups, urges leaders in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., to repeal or revise any provisions that allow race or sex-based preferences in hiring and programming, violate titles VI, VII, or IX of the Civil Rights Act or Equal Protection Clause, and undermine student safety with poor vetting in hiring practices.
“It has become common practice for states to violate federal law in the name of diversity,” Erika Sanzi, senior director of communications at Defending Education, told Fox News Digital.
“With so many ideological bullies in state government and in our schools, cowardice and ignorance have ruled the day for far too long. State laws, regulations and practices that promote (and even require) race and sex-based discrimination must be exposed and eliminated. It’s time that every state cleans up the mess they’ve made in the name of DEI.”
Defending Education sent a letter to all 50 states calling for an audit of K-12 schools to ensure DEI is not being implemented.(George Frey/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Getty)
Teacher vetting is a top concern voiced in the letter, specifically the resignation of Des Moines, Iowa, Superintendent Ian Roberts after he was detained last month by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) following a brief car chase. He was taken into custody because he had “a final order of removal and no work authorization,” authorities said at the time.
Roberts entered the United States illegally from Guyana and was not legally authorized to work in the U.S. after his employment authorization card expired in 2020.
Homeland Security officials said that Roberts faced weapon possession charges from Feb. 5, 2020, and was given a final order of removal by an immigration judge in May 2024. After his arrest, authorities said they found a loaded handgun in his vehicle.
Additionally, numerous examples of teachers being accused of sexually abusing children have been reported in recent years. The letter states that “a public school employee who sexually abuses children is, on average, passed to three school districts and can abuse up to 73 children before they are fired or face legal consequences.”
“Collective bargaining agreements negotiated between teacher unions and school districts are a key contributor to the problem, as they often allow for scrubbing of personnel files, so no record of abuse is left once an offender leaves the system,” the letter says. “This widespread lack of transparency in educational employment is staggering and unacceptable.”
Protesters in Michigan rally against President Donald Trump’s anti-DEI policies, denouncing federal rollbacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.(Getty Images/Dominic Gwinn)
Some of the groups signed onto the letter include School Boards for Academic Excellence, Parents Unite, Protective Parent Coalition, Conservative Ladies of America, Awake Illinois, Power2Parent, and Californians for Equal Rights Foundation.
The Trump administration has taken efforts to roll back DEI practices across the board, including with an executive order combating the practice in the federal government, in the military, and in schools.
As a result, Fox News Digital has reported on several examples of companies and schools failing to eliminate their DEI programs, but instead rebranding them using different terminology and moving DEI employees to other departments.
“It is the exact same toxic nonsense under a new wrapper, and they’re just hoping to extend the grift, because a lot of these people, I would say most of the people, working in DEI are useless,” Consumers’ Research Executive Director Will Hild told Fox News Digital earlier this year.
“At first, they just pushed back on, tried to defend DEI itself, but when that became so obvious that what DEI really was was anti-White, anti-Asian, sometimes anti-Jewish discrimination in hiring and promotion, they abandoned that. Now what they’re trying to do is simply change the terminology that has become so toxic to their brand. So we’re seeing a lot of companies move from having departments of DEI, for example, to ‘departments of belonging’ or ‘departments of inclusivity.’”
Former Des Moines Public School Superintendent Ian Roberts was arrested last month on immigration and weapons charges.(Polk County Sheriff/Associated Press)
Additionally, Defending Education warns that many current state laws are not in line with federal guidance.
Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and legal fellow at Defending Education, told Fox News Digital, “Our assessment of state education laws coast-to-coast reveals a troubling reality: many state laws are at odds with federal anti-discrimination provisions and are going to invite federal scrutiny. State laws like those in Iowa, Illinois, and Maine demand race and sex-based preferencing in everything from programs to sports, scholarships to employment.”
“The Civil Rights Act’s mandates of equality in educational programs aren’t being realized in too many American classrooms, and the duty to secure those promises lies with the state leaders tasked with passing and enforcing state laws. It’s time for states to clean house — because at bottom, education is, and always has been, a state proposition.”
Over the last several years, a few dozen DEI consultant groups have racked up over a hundred million dollars in taxpayer-funded contracts from K-12 schools across the country, according to a report from Defending Education earlier this year, first reported by Fox News Digital.
In total, the groups collected over $123 million from public schools in 40 states. The report found public school DEI contracts in both red and blue states, from Florida and Alabama to California and Washington.
“Public education is a state responsibility,” Defending Education wrote in a press release, along with links to the letters sent to each individual state.
“Yet every state that accepts federal funds must follow federal civil rights law. Too many states are out of compliance, whether through race-based hiring and programming, restroom/locker room and athletic policies that violate sex equality or the scrubbing of personnel records that allow predators to move between schools undetected. Our organizations are calling for ‘legal housekeeping’ to ensure that schools operate lawfully, transparently, and in the best interests of students and families.”
Fox News Digital’s Peter Pinedo contributed to this report.
Andrew Mark Miller is a reporter at Fox News. Find him on Twitter @andymarkmiller and email tips to AndrewMark.Miller@Fox.com.
Back in May, I spent a morning at a family-owned pharmacy in Hanover County — a locality that voted for President Donald Trump in 2024 by a margin of more than 25 points.
I was there alongside local pharmacists and students, a Hanover County mother whose daughter is battling cancer, and a crush of reporters to roll out my plan to lower Virginians’ healthcare and prescription drug costs as their next governor. The event caught the attention of some community members who greeted me donning red T-shirts, Make America Great Again hats and Trump campaign buttons.
Among the group was a local Tea Party member. After we briefly joked about our party allegiances, the conversation quickly turned to the issues.
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger addresses a get-out-the-vote rally on the first day of early voting outside the Eastern Government Center on Sept. 19, 2025, in Henrico County, Virginia.(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
His daughter, who had been battling cancer, had recently lost her healthcare benefits. As her pile of medical bills and worries grew, so had his frustration.
What started as him leaving home on a rainy Wednesday morning to hold me accountable turned into a meaningful conversation about one of the challenges I hear about most from families, veterans, seniors and young people across our commonwealth — the rising cost of medical care.
But it’s not just high healthcare costs that are keeping Virginians up at night. Everywhere I travel across the commonwealth — since I first launched my campaign to serve as Virginia’s next governor, the No. 1 challenge Virginians share with me is the squeeze of high costs. Rising rent and mortgage payments, energy bills, and prices at the pharmacy counter are stretching Virginians’ paychecks thin. Virginians who are working hard to get by deserve a governor who is laser-focused on doing everything in her power to deliver them real relief.
Right now, as we race toward Election Day, I’m on the road for my 40-plus-stop, 11-day statewide bus tour. We’re going everywhere from “Where Virginia Begins” in Lee County up to Leesburg, from Norfolk to Nelson County to lay out the stakes in this year’s elections — because this year, Virginians have the opportunity to choose leadership that actually puts our commonwealth first.
Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger speaks during an Everytown for Gun Safety rally on April 10, 2025, in Alexandria, Virginia. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Since that rainy morning in May, I’ve also rolled out my plans to lower Virginians’ housing costs and Virginians’ energy bills. I’ve rolled out my plans to grow workforce training opportunities — because a four-year degree isn’t the right path for everyone. And I’ve rolled out my plan to make sure Virginia’s public schools are the best in the nation. My opponent — Winsome Earle-Sears, the current lieutenant governor of Virginia — has not shown an inkling of interest in tackling these challenges. She’s laid out no real plans to make Virginia more affordable or grow our economy.
Virginians — including the more than 300,000 federal employees who call our commonwealth home — are grappling with the consequences of the Trump administration’s DOGE firings, use of this devastating government shutdown to escalate those firings, and unpredictable tariffs. My opponent dismissed the devastating impacts of these cuts on Virginia’s economy and even mocked Virginians for worrying about losing their jobs. As Virginia’s next governor, I am clear-eyed about threats to our commonwealth — and I will always stand up for Virginians’ jobs and Virginia’s economy.
If you’re a registered voter in Virginia, my name is on your ballot this year. You may still be making your mind up about who to trust with your vote. You might even be reading this right now and thinking, “I’m a Republican, so why would I vote for a Democrat?”
Abigail Spanberger, Virginia Democratic Party nominee for governor, speaks at a campaign event in Richmond on April 8, 2025.(Max Posner/The Washington Post/Getty Images)
I won my first campaign in 2018 — in a district that hadn’t elected a Democrat in 50 years — in part because thousands of Virginians asked themselves that very question. And ultimately, those voters believed in electing a leader who would put the people of Virginia — not a political party, not a group of donors and not a president — first.
Since I first got into politics, I’ve been focused on addressing some of the most pressing issues facing Virginia’s families and businesses — from protecting Virginians’ access to healthcare coverage to bringing down the cost of living to keeping our communities safe. My focus hasn’t changed — and I’m ready to get to work on day one to deliver for Virginians.
And like I always say: I might be a Democrat, but you don’t have to be one to vote for me. I would be honored to earn your vote and grateful to serve as your governor.
Former Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger represented Virginia’s 7th District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2019 to 2025. She is a former federal law enforcement officer and former CIA case officer. She is now the Democratic nominee for governor of Virginia.
I used to require my students submit AI disclosure statements any time they used generative AI on an assignment. I won’t be doing that anymore.
From the beginning of our current AI-saturated moment, I leaned into ChatGPT, not away, and was an early adopter of AI in my college composition classes. My early adoption of AI hinged on the need for transparency and openness. Students had to disclose to me when and how they were using AI. I still fervently believe in those values, but I no longer believe that required disclosure statements help us achieve them.
Look. I get it. Moving away from AI disclosure statements is antithetical to many of higher ed’s current best practices for responsible AI usage. But I started questioning the wisdom of the disclosure statement in spring 2024, when I noticed a problem. Students in my composition courses were turning in work that was obviously created with the assistance of AI, but they failed to proffer the required disclosure statements. I was puzzled and frustrated. I thought to myself, “I allow them to use AI; I encourage them to experiment with it; all I ask is that they tell me they’re using AI. So, why the silence?” Chatting with colleagues in my department who have similar AI-permissive attitudes and disclosure requirements, I found they were experiencing similar problems. Even when we were telling our students that AI usage was OK, students still didn’t want to fess up.
Fess up. Confess. That’s the problem.
Mandatory disclosure statements feel an awful lot like a confession or admission of guilt right now. And given the culture of suspicion and shame that dominates so much of the AI discourse in higher ed at the moment, I can’t blame students for being reluctant to disclose their usage. Even in a class with a professor who allows and encourages AI use, students can’t escape the broader messaging that AI use should be illicit and clandestine.
AI disclosure statements have become a weird kind of performative confession: an apology performed for the professor, marking the honest students with a “scarlet AI,” while the less scrupulous students escape undetected (or maybe suspected, but not found guilty).
As well intentioned as mandatory AI disclosure statements are, they have backfired on us. Instead of promoting transparency and honesty, they further stigmatize the exploration of ethical, responsible and creative AI usage and shift our pedagogy toward more surveillance and suspicion. I suggest that it is more productive to assume some level of AI usage as a matter of course, and, in response, adjust our methods of assessment and evaluation while simultaneously working toward normalizing the usage of AI tools in our own work.
Studies show that AI disclosure carries risks both in and out of the classroom. One study published in May reports that any kind of disclosure (both voluntary and mandatory) in a wide variety of contexts resulted in decreased trust in the person using AI (this remained true even when study participants had prior knowledge of an individual’s AI usage, meaning, the authors write, “The observed effect can be attributed primarily to the act of disclosure rather than to the mere fact of AI usage.”)
Another recent article points to the gap present between the values of honesty and equity when it comes to mandatory AI disclosure: People won’t feel safe to disclose AI usage if there’s an underlying or perceived lack of trust and respect.
Some who hold unfavorable attitudes toward AI will point to these findings as proof that students should just avoid AI usage altogether. But that doesn’t strike me as realistic. Anti-AI bias will only drive student AI usage further underground and lead to fewer opportunities for honest dialogue. It also discourages the kind of AI literacy employers are starting to expect and require.
Mandatory AI disclosure for students isn’t conducive to authentic reflection but is instead a kind of virtue signaling that chills the honest conversation we should want to have with our students. Coercion only breeds silence and secrecy.
Mandatory AI disclosure also does nothing to curb or reduce the worst features of badly written AI papers, including the vague, robotic tone; the excess of filler language; and, their most egregious hallmark, the fabricated sources and quotes.
Rather than demanding students confess their AI crimes to us through mandatory disclosure statements, I advocate both a shift in perspective and a shift of assignments. We need to move from viewing students’ AI assistance as a special exception warranting reactionary surveillance to accepting and normalizing AI usage as a now commonplace feature of our students’ education.
That shift does not mean we should allow and accept any and all student AI usage. We shouldn’t resign ourselves to reading AI slop that a student generates in an attempt to avoid learning. When confronted with a badly written AI paper that sounds nothing like the student who submitted it, the focus shouldn’t be on whether the student used AI but on why it’s not good writing and why it fails to satisfy the assignment requirements. It should also go without saying that fake sources and quotes, regardless of whether they are of human or AI origin, should be called out as fabrications that won’t be tolerated.
We have to build assignments and evaluation criteria that disincentivize the kinds of unskilled AI usage that circumvent learning. We have to teach students basic AI literacy and ethics. We have to build and foster learning environments that value transparency and honesty. But real transparency and honesty require safety and trust before they can flourish.
We can start to build such a learning environment by working to normalize AI usage with our students. Some ideas that spring to mind include:
Telling students when and how you use AI in your own work, including both successes and failures in AI usage.
Offering clear explanations to students about how they could use AI productively at different points in your class and why they might not want to use AI at other points. (Danny Liu’s Menus model is an excellent example of this strategy.)
Adding an assignment such as an AI usage and reflection journal, which offers students a low-stakes opportunity to experiment with AI and reflect upon the experience.
Adding an opportunity for students to present to the class on at least one cool, weird or useful thing that they did with AI (maybe even encouraging them to share their AI failures, as well).
The point with these examples is that we are inviting students into the messy, exciting and scary moment we all find ourselves in. They shift the focus away from coerced confessions to a welcoming invitation to join in and share their own wisdom, experience and expertise that they accumulate as we all adjust to the age of AI.
Julie McCown is an associate professor of English at Southern Utah University.She is working on a book about how embracing AI disruption leads to more engaging and meaningful learning for students and faculty.
