Explore the vast range of titles available.

Education has been an unusually busy beat for journalists in 2018. Maria Ferguson reflects on three major stories: the shooting in Parkland, Florida; the inflated graduation rates in D.C. schools, and the poor public performance of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. These stories reveal the value of dedicating time and resources to education reporting.

A controversial US government proposal to change the law that prohibits gender discrimination in education has drawn more than 104,000 public comments, including many from scientists. The education department's proposal would redefine sexual harassment from \"unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature\" to \"unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to the [institution's] education program or activity\". [...]in a joint comment, 75 science and education groups rejected those arguments, saying that the government has ignored existing research \"on the nature and extent of harm caused by sexual harassment\" in education.

The recent pushback against charter schools, which has taken many by surprise, stems from what Maria Ferguson describes as a perfect storm of circumstances. Because states approach charter school authorization and oversight in so many different ways, the landscape has become confusing. Betsy DeVos’s championing of charters as part of her school choice agenda has led to suspicion of the movement. And some presidential candidates have portrayed charters as an enemy of public education. All of these circumstances could turn into an opportunity to address the issues that matter to both supporters and critics of charter schools.

It is commonplace to equate the arrival of a new conservative administration in Washington, DC, with the “rolling back” of the federal activities. We disagree with this conventional perspective, and seek to demonstrate that the equation of conservative Republicanism and retrenchment elides a critical change in the relationship between party politics and State power—a relationship that Donald Trump seems determined to nurture. Drawing on primary research, we argue that partisanship in the United States is no longer a struggle over the size of the State; rather it is a contest to control national administrative power. Since the late 1960s, conservative administrations have sought to redeploy rather than dismantle or roll back state power. Through “redeployment,” conservative presidents have sustained previous levels of State spending or State activity, but in a way reflecting a new administration’s ideology.

This article explores the history of collegiate activism and the influence students have had on institutional, state, and federal policy in the U.S. The paper presents a historiography of student activism that explores how historians have written about student activism, draws connections between the historical narrative and contemporary issues in student activism, and theorizes how higher education policy has shifted in response or opposition to student activism. Current higher education leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders can learn from historical examples of student organizing as they engage in creating campuses that serve students and communities well.

In response the medical school wrote to the education department arguing that it complied with a previous Supreme Court ruling laying out the conditions in which race may be considered in admissions. The white conservative activist Edward Blum, who represented Fisher, has since founded and now leads Students for Fair Admissions, a group whose membership is largely Asian American, which is suing Harvard, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the University of Wisconsin at Madison, alleging major discrimination against Asians in admissions.1 Blum has brought six cases before the Supreme Court, winning four. Harvard, which has called the claims of the government and Students for Fair Admissions “hollow,” has drawn support from its own Harvard Asian-American Alumni Alliance, from the Asian American Legal Defence and Education Fund, and from over 530 scholars in race, education, and Asian American studies. 1 US District Court for the District of Massachusetts.