#American Academic Leadership Institute

[mascrapping]

2023: Washington DC - AALI

The reason I was in Washington, D.C., was to attend the American Academic Leadership Institute (AALI), marking the second part of a year-long program. I had previously been to D.C. for the first portion of the institute in June 2022. This scrapbook spread was especially fun to create, as I chose a red theme to match the AALI logo and bring energy to the design. The training was held at the…

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The CFPB is genuinely making America better, and they're going HARD

On June 20, I'm keynoting the LOCUS AWARDS in OAKLAND.

Let's take a sec here and notice something genuinely great happening in the US government: the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau's stunning, unbroken streak of major, muscular victories over the forces of corporate corruption, with the backing of the Supreme Court (yes, that Supreme Court), and which is only speeding up!

A little background. The CFPB was created in 2010. It was Elizabeth Warren's brainchild, an institution that was supposed to regulate finance from the perspective of the American public, not the American finance sector. Rather than fighting to "stabilize" the financial sector (the mission that led to Obama taking his advisor Timothy Geithner's advice to permit the foreclosure crisis to continue in order to "foam the runways" for the banks), the Bureau would fight to defend us from bankers.

The CFPB got off to a rocky start, with challenges to the unique system of long-term leadership appointments meant to depoliticize the office, as well as the sudden resignation of its inaugural boss, who broke his promise to see his term through in order to launch an unsuccessful bid for political office.

But after the 2020 election, the Bureau came into its own, when Biden poached Rohit Chopra from the FTC and put him in charge. Chopra went on a tear, taking on landlords who violated the covid eviction moratorium:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/20/euthanize-rentier-enablers/#cfpb

Then banning payday lenders' scummiest tactics:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/01/29/planned-obsolescence/#academic-fraud

Then striking at one of fintech's most predatory grifts, the "earned wage access" hustle:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/01/usury/#tech-exceptionalism

Then closing the loophole that let credit reporting bureaus (like Equifax, who doxed every single American in a spectacular 2019 breach) avoid regulation by creating data brokerage divisions and claiming they weren't part of the regulated activity of credit reporting:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/16/the-second-best-time-is-now/#the-point-of-a-system-is-what-it-does

Chopra went on to promise to ban data-brokers altogether:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/13/goulash/#material-misstatement

Then he banned comparison shopping sites where you go to find the best bank accounts and credit cards from accepting bribes and putting more expensive options at the top of the list. Instead, he's requiring banks to send the CFPB regular, accurate lists of all their charges, and standing up a federal operated comparison shopping site that gives only accurate and honest rankings. Finally, he's made an interoperability rule requiring banks to let you transfer to another institution with one click, just like you change phone carriers. That means you can search an honest site to find the best deal on your banking, and then, with a single click, transfer your accounts, your account history, your payees, and all your other banking data to that new bank:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/21/let-my-dollars-go/#personal-financial-data-rights

Somewhere in there, big business got scared. They cooked up a legal theory declaring the CFPB's funding mechanism to be unconstitutional and got the case fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, in a bid to put Chopra and the CFPB permanently out of business. Instead, the Supremes – these Supremes! – upheld the CFPB's funding mechanism in a 7-2 ruling:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/supreme-court-lets-cfpb-funding-stand/

That ruling was a starter pistol for Chopra and the Bureau. Maybe it seemed like they were taking big swings before, but it turns out all that was just a warmup. Last week on The American Prospect, Robert Kuttner rounded up all the stuff the Bureau is kicking off:

https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/2024-06-07-window-on-corporate-deceptions/

First: regulating Buy Now, Pay Later companies (think: Klarna) as credit-card companies, with all the requirements for disclosure and interest rate caps dictated by the Truth In Lending Act:

https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2024/06/cfpb-applies-credit-card-rules

Next: creating a registry of habitual corporate criminals. This rogues gallery will make it harder for other agencies – like the DOJ – and state Attorneys General to offer bullshit "delayed prosecution agreements" to companies that compulsively rip us off:

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-creates-registry-to-detect-corporate-repeat-offenders/

Then there's the rule against "fine print deception" – which is when the fine print in a contract lies to you about your rights, like when a mortgage lender forces you waive a right you can't actually waive, or car lenders that make you waive your bankruptcy rights, which, again, you can't waive:

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-warns-against-deception-in-contract-fine-print/

As Kuttner writes, the common thread running through all these orders is that they ban deceptive practices – they make it illegal for companies to steal from us by lying to us. Especially in these dying days of class action suits – rapidly becoming obsolete thanks to "mandatory arbitration waivers" that make you sign away your right to join a class action – agencies like the CFPB are our only hope of punishing companies that lie to us to steal from us.

There's a lot of bad stuff going on in the world right now, and much of it – including an active genocide – is coming from the Biden White House.

But there are people in the Biden Administration who care about the American people and who are effective and committed fighters who have our back. What's more, they're winning. That doesn't make all the bad news go away, but sometimes it feels good to take a moment and take the W.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/10/getting-things-done/#deliverism

[jstor]

Edward Christopher Williams (11 Feb. 1871 - 24 Dec. 1929) was a pioneering African American librarian, educator, and scholar who played a vital role in shaping library collections at Western Reserve University (WRU) and Howard University. Born in Cleveland to Daniel P. Williams, a prominent African American figure, and Mary Kilkary Williams, a Clevelander of Irish descent, Williams embarked on a remarkable journey of academic and professional achievement.

Graduating from Adelbert College of WRU in 1892, Williams quickly made his mark as he assumed the role of first assistant librarian at the institution. His dedication and expertise saw him ascend to the position of head librarian in 1894 and university librarian in 1898. Eager to deepen his knowledge, Williams pursued further studies in library science at the New York Library School in Albany, completing the rigorous 2-year program in just one year.

Williams's impact on WRU's library was profound; he significantly expanded its collection and elevated its standards, establishing himself as an authority in library organization and bibliography. His advocacy for the establishment of a school of library science at WRU led to its inception in 1904, where he became an esteemed instructor, offering courses in reference work, bibliography, public documents, and book selection.

A founding member of the Ohio Library Association, Williams played a pivotal role in shaping its constitution and direction. However, in 1909, he left Cleveland to assume the role of principal at M St. High School in Washington, D.C. His tenure there was marked by his unwavering commitment to education and leadership.

In 1916, Williams joined Howard University as university librarian, further cementing his legacy in the realm of academia. Not only did he oversee the university's library, but he also directed Howard's library training class, taught German, and later chaired the Department of Romance Languages.

In pursuit of academic excellence, Williams embarked on a sabbatical in 1929 to pursue a Ph.D. at Columbia University. Tragically, his studies were cut short by his untimely passing later that year.

In 1902, Williams married Ethel P. Chesnutt, the daughter of Charles Chesnutt, a renowned author. Their union bore one son, Charles, who would carry on his father's legacy in the years to come.

Read more about Edward Christopher Williams here.

[palms-upturned]

For US unions like the UAW — which has thousands of members in weapons factories making the bombs, missiles, and aircraft used by Israel, as well in university departments doing research linked to the Israeli military — the Palestinian trade union call to action is particularly relevant. When the UAW’s national leadership came out in support of a cease-fire on December 1, they also voted to establish a “Divestment and Just Transition Working Group.” The stated purpose of the working group is to study the UAW’s own economic ties to Israel and explore ways to convert war-related industries to production for peaceful purposes while ensuring a just transition for weapons workers.

Members of UAW Labor for Palestine say they have started making visits to a Colt factory in Connecticut, which holds a contract to supply rifles to the Israeli military, to talk with their fellow union members about Palestine, a cease-fire, and a just transition. They want to see the union’s leadership support such organizing activity.

“If UAW leaders decided to, they could, tomorrow, form a national organizing campaign to educate and mobilize rank-and-file towards the UAW’s own ceasefire and just transition call,” UAW Labor for Palestine members said in a statement. “They could hold weapons shop town halls in every region; they could connect their small cadre of volunteer organizers — like us — to the people we are so keen to organize with; they could even send some of their staff to help with this work.”

On January 21, the membership of UAW Local 551, which represents 4,600 autoworkers at Ford’s Chicago Assembly Plant (who were part of last year’s historic stand-up strike) endorsed the Palestinian trade unions’ call to not cooperate in the production and transportation of arms for Israel. Ten days later, UAW Locals 2865 and 5810, representing around forty-seven thousand academic workers at the University of California, passed a measure urging the union’s national leaders to ensure that the envisioned Divestment and Just Transition Working Group “has the needed resources to execute its mission, and that Palestinian, Arab and Muslim workers whose communities are disproportionately affected by U.S.-backed wars are well-represented on the committee.”

Members of UAW Locals 2865 and 5810 at UC Santa Cruz’s Astronomy Department have pledged to withhold any labor that supports militarism and to refuse research collaboration with military institutions and arms companies. In December, unionized academic workers from multiple universities formed Researchers Against War (RAW) to expose and cut ties between their research and warfare, and to organize in their labs and departments for more transparency about where the funding for their work comes from and more control over what their labor is used for. RAW, which was formed after a series of discussions by union members first convened by US Labor Against Racism and War last fall, hosted a national teach-in and planning meeting on February 12.

Meanwhile, public sector workers in New York City have begun their own campaign to divest their pension money from Israel. On January 25, rank-and-file members of AFSCME District Council (DC) 37 launched a petition calling on the New York City Employees’ Retirement System to divest the $115 million it holds in Israeli securities. The investments include $30 million in bonds that directly fund the Israeli military and its activities. “As rank-and-file members of DC 37 who contribute to and benefit from the New York City Employees’ Retirement System and care about the lives of working people everywhere, we refuse to support the Israeli government and the corporations that extract profit from the killing of innocent civilians,” the petition states.

In an election year when President Joe Biden and other Democratic candidates will depend heavily on organized labor for donations and especially get-out-the-vote efforts, rank and filers are also trying to push their unions to exert leverage on the president by getting him to firmly stand against the ongoing massacre in Gaza. NEA members with Educators for Palestine are calling on their union’s leaders to withdraw their support for Biden’s reelection campaign until he stops “sending military funding, equipment, and intelligence to Israel,” marching from AFT headquarters to NEA headquarters in Washington, DC on February 10 to assert their demand. Similarly, after the UAW International Executive Board endorsed Biden last month — a decision that sparked intense division within the union — UAW Labor for Palestine is demanding the endorsement be revoked “until [Biden] calls for a permanent ceasefire and stops sending weapons to Israel.”

[darkeagleruins]

Presenting the King and Queen of the criminal illegal invasion, Samantha Power (born in the UK) and her husband Cass Sunstein.

GPS—they met together and separately at Barack Hussein Obama II’s war room/mansion in Washington, DC hundreds of times during the Biden/Harris Regime, 19 times since the election and 4 times since President Trump took office.

The circumstances surrounding the controversial financial and political of Samantha Power, a former USAID administrator, and her significant increase in net worth during her tenure in public office. Power’s wealth reportedly surged from $6.7 million in 2021 to $30 million by 2024, raises questions about how such a dramatic increase occurred despite her official annual salary of $180,000.

This financial growth has led to public scrutiny and allegations of financial misconduct within USAID under Power's leadership.

USAID, an organization tasked with managing billions in global funding, under audit for alleged misuse of funds, including spending on contentious programs like transgender initiatives and cultural projects abroad.

These programs served as conduits for financial kickbacks to lawmakers and officials, enriching them at the expense of American taxpayers. Powers funneled billions into NGOs financing the criminal illegal invasion of America.

Power’s husband, Cass Sunstein, also plays a key role in this narrative. Sunstein, a senior adviser on immigration policy at DHS during the Biden administration, allegedly shaped policies that created the “open-border” system.

This was seen as complementary to Power’s role at USAID, with Power funding programs to facilitate immigration while Sunstein ensured these policies were implemented. This was a coordinated “one-two punch,” enabling illegal immigration while circumventing any accountability or transparency.

Sunstein’s academic and professional background, citing his 2008 white paper, Conspiracy Theories, which advocated for government infiltration of online movements to neutralize narratives that could undermine U.S. military and diplomatic efforts.

This idea extended to behavioral influence strategies outlined in his book, Nudge, which became a foundational text for professionals working in counter-disinformation and media literacy.

The book emphasized shaping public behavior without overt coercion, using techniques like algorithmic manipulation, social media deplatforming, and other indirect methods to discourage dissent.

USAID’s role in psychological (gaslighting) operations was engaged in misinformation campaigns both domestically and abroad. Coupled with Sunstein’s advocacy for “raising the cost” of dissenting behavior, contributed to an erosion of free speech protections. Examples included penalties for questioning COVID-19 policies, such as job loss, social media bans, and reputational damage, all designed to discourage opposition without resorting to legal consequences.

There are even broader concerns about the interplay between government roles and private-sector enrichment, with a pattern of officials transitioning from public service to lucrative positions in finance or industry.

This “blob-to-banker pipeline” allows individuals to leverage insider knowledge for personal gain. For instance, Jared Cohen, a former State Department official, having transitioned to roles at Google Jigsaw and later Goldman Sachs, where his government connections reportedly informed investment strategies.

The current system has zero transparency, accountability, and erodes public trust.

USAID’s misuse of funds, coupled with Power’s rapid wealth accumulation, exemplifies the broader issue of financial exploitation within government institutions.

Word needs to get out. Share this post, do your own research, engage in discourse, and hold public officials accountable.

[uispeccoll]

Voices from the Stacks: Phillip G. Hubbard

Image: Phillip G. Hubbard in May 1990 (Faculty and Staff Vertical Files RG01.0015.003).

Phillip G. Hubbard was an engineering professor, administrator, civil rights champion, and distinguished member of the University of Iowa community. He was the first Black professor at the university and spent more than 40 years advocating for students and providing counsel to six presidents. In 1971, he became the first Black vice president at any Big 10 university.

Image: Hubbard in 1966, after being appointed dean of academic affairs (Faculty and Staff Vertical Files RG01.0015.003)

Hubbard was born in Missouri in 1921, but his mother moved the family to Des Moines, Iowa—where the schools were desegrated—so her children could have a better education. Hubbard attended North High School and shined shoes to save up money for college. He first came to the UI as an undergraduate student in 1940, when the university was still largely, if informally, segregated. Black men were excluded from university housing, and all students of color were discouraged from using the cafeteria and attending social events. Like many Black male students, Hubbard lived with a local Black family during his undergraduate years because of housing discrimination in Iowa City. Years later, Hubbard and his wife, Wynonna, would welcome Black students into their own home.

In 1943, Hubbard enlisted in the Army reserves but eventually returned to the UI to finish his BS in electrical engineering, graduating with honors in 1947. That same year, he was hired by the university as a research engineer, making him the first Black faculty member at the UI. He went on to earn an MA in hydraulics and mechanics, a PhD in engineering, and became an assistant professor in 1954.

Image: 1968 University of Iowa Hawkeye Yearbook

As the civil rights movement reached its peak throughout the United States, Hubbard helped to found the Committee on Human Rights to combat housing and employment discrimination in at the UI and in Iowa City. They investigated complaints and lobbied for Fair Housing ordinances, which were adopted by the city in 1964.

Hubbard was appointed dean of academic affairs at the UI in 1966, becoming the first Black administrator at a university in the state of Iowa. In 1971, he was named vice president of student services. During his leadership tenure, he was a staunch advocate for students of all walks of life. He fought for better undergraduate support and engagement and was admired on campus for his willingness to listen to student concerns. His steady relationship with students helped see the university through the turbulence of the Vietnam War and protests that rocked the campus.

Image: Hubbard featured in the 1967 University of Iowa Hawkeye Yearbook. He was known around campus for his dedication to uplifting students’ voices

In 1967 Hubbard spearheaded the Rust, Iowa, and Le Moyne for Expanding Educational Horizons (RILEEH) program, which created partnership between the UI and predominantly Black colleges in the rural south. RILEEH facilitated student exchanges, teacher training, and graduate research to help support under-resourced academic institutions in Mississippi and Tennessee. Later, Hubbard would recruit faculty from these same institutions to help build the emerging Afro-American studies program.

As part of his work to promote cultural studies at UI, Hubbard chaired a newly created committee on Afro-American studies in 1968. He encouraged students of all backgrounds to take classes in this emerging field. He saw inclusivity and cultural competency as vital in higher education, believing the university should produce well rounded students who are prepared to live and work in a diverse world. He advocated for the Afro-American Cultural House and the Chicano Indian American Cultural Center (now called the Latino Native American Cultural Center), understanding the importance of creating a welcoming and supportive environment for minority students.

To that end, Hubbard created Opportunity at Iowa in 1987, a program aimed at increasing diversity at the university through the recruitment and retention of minority students and faculty. This included scholarships, outreach to underserved public schools in Iowa, and summer workshops for highschoolers.

Image: Daily Iowan clipping announcing the newly created Afro-American Cultural Center. Hubbard was a huge advocate for the house and helped them secure their first location in 1968.

After more than 40 years of service, Hubbard retired from the UI in 1990, though he continued to advise Opportunity at Iowa. A year later, Union field (located south of the Iowa Memorial Union) was renamed Hubbard Park in his honor. In 2001, he received a lifetime achievement award from the Iowa City Human Rights Commission.

Hubbard passed away in 2002 at the age of 80. Today numerous scholarships, medals, and awards bare the Hubbard name, including the Philip G. Hubbard Human Rights Award and the Wynonna G. Hubbard Scholarship. As we reflect on his life and legacy, we should strive to honor Hubbard’s commitment to human rights and his dedication to uplifting students of all racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

Image: Hubbard with Students in 1983 (Frederick W. Kent Collection of Photographs).

Image: Dedication of Hubbard Park in August 1991 (Daily Iowan Archives)

Image: Hubbard Park today

To learn more, view the finding aid for the Phillip G. Hubbard Papers (RG99.0248), or visit us in person or online at the Iowa Digital Library. You can also search the Daily Iowan archives for articles on Phillip Hubbard’s work, or check out his autobiography My Iowa Journey: The Life Story of the University of Iowa's First African American Professor on InfoHawk+.

-Anne M, Olson Graduate Research Assistant

[mariacallous]

The recent weeks have obliged me to unearth some research I had hoped could stay on the backburner. In 2023, I wrote about the major forms of democratic erosion facing the United States: election subversion and executive aggrandizement. “Even a legitimately elected leader can undermine democracy,” I noted, “if they eliminate governmental ‘checks and balances’ or consolidate power in unaccountable institutions.” In 2022, I suggested that, if weaknesses in the formal institutions of American politics made it difficult to forestall additional assaults on the Constitution, the final backstop of democracy is civil society.

Historically, the United States has been fortunate to have a strong civil society. Many of these institutions have weakened. In this article, I quickly review how some sectors—the media, the academy, business, and mass voluntary organizations—are responding to “the most serious examples of executive branch malfeasance in American history.”

American civil society has essential nodes of power that must be energized in the coming days and for the foreseeable future. Not merely the individuals in these institutions, but the institutions themselves must coordinate to provide a public counterweight to the sharp lurch toward personalist rule. That work is not easy. Any more time lost to disbelief, silence, and acquiescence will make it much harder.

Some major media institutions have been slow off the mark. Major scoops have come from unexpected outlets, including independent journalists and the technology magazine WIRED, which was the first to reveal that Elon Musk’s young staff had the power to alter the $6 trillion Treasury payment system, a fact that Treasury officials had denied. (A federal judge has since blocked access. An earlier ruling had limited access to read-only, a problematic ruling given Musk’s conflicts of interest and the security threats posed by his unvetted and secretive young staff. It is unclear if either order is being followed.)

DC’s hometown paper, the Washington Post, should by rights have the best sources in the federal government, but the interference of the paper’s owner, Jeff Bezos, in the planned endorsement of Kamala Harris, and his prominent place at the Trump inauguration, may well be keeping whistleblowers away. The paper nonetheless has provided some important reporting, including this round-up of Elon Musk’s interference in government operations. The New York Times has buried several excellent, insightful analyses and essays deep in the paper, and adopted tortured euphemisms and vague, small-print headlines that leave their readers uninformed of the gravity of the news.

Academic institutions are largely silent, but that may be changing. Academics have for years been sounding the alarm about America’s democratic erosion, and many continue to provide vital analysis and context. See, for example, these analyses from Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Kim Lane Scheppele, and Don Moynihan. But academia has been outspoken as individuals. Institutions have mostly remained silent—though they may be shaken loose from their apathy by the executive orders interfering with billions in congressionally appropriated funds for scientific research.

Coordinated public pronouncements from university leadership, especially from law and medical schools, would assist citizens in understanding the scope of the dangers confronting the country. Top hospital administrators and medical associations that have been quiescent in recent weeks need to make clear the immense public health costs of ill-considered, arbitrary, and unlawful interference with government-funded science. In addition, professional associations have the power to sanction their members, a power they should exercise in defense of the public sphere, as my colleague Quinta Jurecic has argued.

Business concerns are not yet being channeled into political action. Autocratic populist leaders damage the economy; their countries see their GDPs drop due to erratic policymaking, cronyism, and underinvestment in public goods. But, as I wrote last year, business leaders have a tragic history of misjudging these dangers. American business influence, moreover, has grown increasingly ideologically conservative and focused on narrow benefits like tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks.

Since the election, business leaders have truckled to the new administration—a trend many, including President Trump, have suggested is driven by fear of official reprisals. That fear is, of course, one of the common ways in which opposition to populist authoritarian leaders is eliminated.

It may be, however, that business will awake to the massive economic dangers posed by executive overreach. Opaque and unpredictable stoppages of congressionally mandated spending by federal agencies will ramify throughout the economy. An unvetted young individual meddling with the code that underwrites the Treasury payment system is, as one Treasury contractor wrote, an “unprecedented insider threat risk.” (That contractor has since been “removed” by their employer, Booz Allen, a consulting firm heavily reliant on government contracts.)

Mass mobilization is underway, but those efforts will struggle if elites continue to underplay the magnitude of the moment. Congressional offices have been flooded with phone calls. As the volume went from the usual dozens to more than 1,500 calls per minute, the phone system buckled under the strain. Advocacy organizations appear to have been caught flat-footed by the speed of Musk’s incursions. Small protests have occurred at government agencies and congressional offices, with union organizations often playing a key role.

Religious organizations have not yet been prominent in most public protests, but they have an essential role to play. As my colleague Jonathan Rauch has written in a new book, churches must combat the rise of what has been termed Christian nationalism.

More broadly, public opposition to the second Trump administration remains far smaller than it was the last time around, even though recent actions represent a far more aggressive assault on American governance. This is perhaps in part because Trump’s loss of the popular vote in 2016 provided an impetus for organizing before the administration even began. Whether the organizing gap will close is a critical question in the weeks and months to come.

Across all of sectors of civil society, coordination is key. Individual objections do not carry the weight of joint action. It is worth noting that censorship in authoritarian China does not focus on “negative, even vitriolic, criticism of the state,” it silences “comments that represent, reinforce, or spur social mobilization.” Resistance to authoritarianism, like democracy itself, is a collective endeavor.

[beardedmrbean]

Harvard University said it will not comply with demands issued by the Trump administration aimed at curtailing antisemitism on campus, resulting in the White House freezing billions in federal contracts and grants.

“No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” the Ivy League school’s president, Alan Garber, wrote in a statement Monday.

The Trump administration quickly shot back at the university’s refusal — announcing a freeze on $2.2 billion in multi-year grants and $60 million in multi-year contracts mere hours later.

“Harvard’s statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges – that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws,” President Trump’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism said in a statement to The Post.

“The disruption of learning that has plagued campuses in recent years is unacceptable. The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable. It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support.”

In March, the Trump administration warned it was looking at $256 million in federal contracts for the elite Cambridge, Mass. school, as well as $8.7 billion in additional “multi-year grant commitments,” claiming Harvard had failed to take meaningful action to root out antisemitism.

The Ivy League was ordered to implement multiple changes to maintain its “financial relationship with the federal government,” in a letter earlier this month from Trump’s newly formed antisemitism task force.

Some of them included reforming its student discipline policies, dismantling all diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and stepping up its admissions screening of international students to “prevent admitting students hostile to the American values,” including “students supportive of terrorism or antisemitism.”

The prestigious university was also ordered to make admissions decisions based on merit alone and “cease all preferences based on race, color, national origin, or proxies thereof.”

Garber called the administration’s demands “unprecedented,” and said the laundry list of required reforms “makes clear that the intention is not to work with us to address antisemitism in a cooperative and constructive manner.”

He further claimed the task force’s missive “goes beyond the power of the federal government … violates Harvard’s First Amendment rights and exceeds the statutory limits of the government’s authority under Title VI.”

He added that it “threatens our values as a private institution devoted to the pursuit, production, and dissemination of knowledge.”

Columbia University was given a similar set of demands last month from Trump’s task force, to which it largely agreed to adhere to avoid losing around $400 million in federal grants.

Among them, enforcing a ban on masks for protesters and crackdowns on anti-Israel demonstrators who break the law, including punishing those responsible for the violent takeover of Hamilton Hall in April 2024, during which dozens of masked rioters smashed their way into the academic building and barricaded themselves inside.

Columbia was given a month to comply, and hours before the deadline imposed by the task force expired, the Ivy League agreed to sweeping new policy changes, including new, stricter rules governing facial coverings and empowering campus cops to make arrests.

The school also committed to installing new leadership tasked with overseeing curricula for its Middle East, South Asian and African Studies department, as well as its Center for Palestine Studies, according to a memo from administrators.

However, days later, the school’s interim president, Katrina Armstrong, was ousted by the prestigious school’s board of trustees after publicly agreeing to uphold the school’s mask ban but promising faculty she would not behind closed doors.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

If you are not a close follower of American college campus politics, you are likely to be unfamiliar with a woman who has been making headlines for over a month in the US and increasingly around the world. The lady in question, one Claudine Gay, was President of Harvard, one of the most renowned educational institutions in the world, until earlier this week when she resigned over plagiarism allegations.

Why does or should anyone care about this? Well, Gay’s decision to step down is the culmination of long-running efforts to address the cancer at the heart of Western societies: the idea that the way to fix injustices of the past is to commit injustices today.

Following her resignation, Gay’s defenders were quick to emphasise the racial dimension of this story. Ibram X. Kendi, for example, tweeted that “Racist mobs won’t stop until they topple all Black people from positions of power and influence who are not reinforcing the structure of racism”.

And while his claims of this being a racist campaign are absurd, it is true that Gay was not targeted solely for seemingly adopting the personal motto: “I came, I saw, I copied”. She became a focus of major Harvard donor concerns and a media campaign led by Christopher Rufo – a man I would approvingly describe as the diversity industry’s greatest enemy – in the light of her mind-boggling testimony in Congress. Her statements, given alongside the Presidents of MIT and UPenn, revealed the core of the ideology the entire Western education system is based on in all its glory.

The oppressor vs. oppressed mindset which is - no matter how uncomfortable this may make some readers - cultural Marxism, says simply that white people and “over-performing” minorities like Indians, Jews, Chinese, Japanese and Korean Americans should be discriminated against in hiring and student applications in favour of “underprivileged groups”. As a result, college campuses on which regular meltdowns have occurred for a decade over such “hate speech” as dressing in a Mexican costume for Halloween found themselves with nothing to say about pro-Hamas demonstrations and the harassment of Jewish students on their campuses in the wake of the October 7 attacks.

But even that is not painting the full picture. Yes, Gay, a darling of the diversity industry, was targeted for her plagiarism following her complete failure of leadership in recent months. But she was also partially targeted because of the assumption, if not outright conclusion, that the reason she was appointed in the first place was, to put it mildly, not merit alone.

After all, Gay’s primary achievement is not stellar academic work, exemplary managerial skills or even charisma and force of personality. She was appointed President of Harvard following a distinguished career in fields like “improving diversity” and researching “race and identity”. To put it bluntly, many people believe that she is a diversity hire and the reason she pushed the DEI ideology that eventually led to her appalling testimony in Congress is that she is herself a beneficiary of it.

To be clear, she has not been forced out for being black. She has been forced out for being placed in a position for which she had neither the skills nor experience to succeed and then failing in it. This is the rotten legacy of affirmative action, which, as Thomas Sowell explained decades ago in 90 seconds and in many of his books since, hurts the very people it is attempting to help:

If allowing students to enter universities in which they are destined to fail for the sake of diversity harms them, then what might be said about hiring people for leadership roles in major institutions in which they are destined to fail? This harms not only them but also the people who work and study at those institutions.

To be clear, I have no evidence that Claudine Gay was hired ahead of better, more qualified candidates. But it is not hard to imagine that a position holding the prestige, reputation and nearly $1-million-a-year salary the role of Harvard President commands could have been filled by someone with more executive experience, academic achievements and other relevant expertise.

This is the other curse of the counterproductive attempts to artificially increase the presence of “underrepresented” groups in employment and education. Because everyone knows that some people are routinely given unfair preferential treatment, it becomes easier and easier for the rest of us to suspect specific individuals of being there for reasons other than merit.

So here is the truth: we must return to pursuing the goal of a colour-blind society immediately. There is no such thing as positive discrimination. All discrimination is wrong. And because it is wrong, it will create precisely the kind of resentment that Claudine Gay is now facing. She is seen as the standard-bearer of the DEI industry and is being treated as such by people who have had enough.

All of us must be treated on the content of our character. When we refuse to follow this principle, we hurt everyone: white, black, hispanic, Asian, Jewish. A healthy society relies on the equal treatment of all individuals. The fact that we have to say this out loud in 2024 is a sign of how far we’ve fallen.

DEI must be dismantled. This will take years, perhaps decades. But, in recent weeks, for the first time in a long time, we have grounds for optimism.

[qqueenofhades]

Do you have any idea where all the money in education IS going? People talk about administrators, but their percentage of the overall budget seems lowish? Facilities are expensive, but often paid for with bequests, no? Where the hell is all the money going?

The same place it's going in every other capitalistic American enterprise: to senior executives, endowments, and other places that decidedly do not "trickle down" (because you know, it never does). See my many previous posts about how college costs skyrocketed starting in the 1980s and post-secondary higher education was transformed from something in which most of the costs were governmentally subsidized to something expected to be paid (at higher and higher levels) either privately out of the consumer's pocket or from thousands of dollars in student loans. Because you guessed it, Reaganomics.

I can tell you one place it absolutely is NOT going, i.e. salaries of faculty and staff, at least in the less capitalistically sexy fields of study. The university where I work never hurts for money in the business and law schools, but because I am in the humanities/education/history, yeah, our department's budget is not in great shape. Of course, yes, COVID hit the higher-education sector like crazy (as it did everywhere else) and universities haven't figured how to recover from that, but just as with the rest of America, it's a model that is designed to funnel the vast majority of profits, i.e. from skyrocketing student tuition rates and other increased fees, to the highly compensated senior leadership and very little to the academics who do the work that makes the place, you know, RUN.

This is a bugaboo for both me and every other academic I know, because (again, just as with the rest of capitalism) it doesn't HAVE to be this way. I shouldn't be trying to manage a department that has to rely heavily on adjunct faculty every quarter and doesn't have a sustainable long-term scheduling or research model, because we're so badly understaffed with core tenure-track faculty and they won't let us hire any more, while constantly cutting our budget and giving us laughable raises (mine, after getting sterling performance reviews across the board, was a whole... 72 extra cents an hour. I wish I was joking). There is money tied up in the institution and the establishment (and as noted, I work at a well-regarded and highly-ranked private university, so it's not a matter of not having enough), but the system distributes it in a way that is inequitable and results in enforced scarcity, especially in the humanities. It's not that there isn't money to pay us fairly, it's just that they have chosen not to, because they exist in the same capitalist system as the rest of the west.

This is why there have been strikes by graduate and early-career academics in both the UK and US (I have worked/studied/taught in both places, and they're both BAD for paying lower-level academics and even established-career academics), because they simply do not pay us enough to live on or build a career on (by a long shot, ESPECIALLY if you're the only person in your household and don't have shared expenses with a partner/roommate/several roommates). This is after most of us have several advanced degrees and the debt resulting from such. We get burned out, we can't make a living in this field, we leave, and it's hollowed out even further. So. Yeah.

[eretzyisrael]

by Rachel O'Donoghue

The past academic year saw an unsettling rise in antisemitism on American college campuses as anti-Israel protests swept through some of the nation’s most prestigious universities. Initially, college administrations, seemingly paralyzed by indecision, justified these disruptions under the guise of protecting students’ rights to express themselves—even as protesters commandeered campus spaces with “anti-Zionist” encampments that effectively ostracized Jewish students.

The situation reached a breaking point after disastrous congressional hearings led to the resignations of Harvard President Claudine Gay and Penn’s Liz Magill, casting a harsh light on university leadership’s ineffectual handling of protests. At institutions like Harvard and Columbia, these demonstrations escalated into aggressive actions, prompting reluctant administrators to call in police and impose disciplinary measures on some student protest leaders.

While these resignations and official responses might have signaled a potential turning point, evidence suggests little has truly changed.

Harvard University, for example, has long grappled with allegations of campus antisemitism, from the Cornel West tenure controversy to recent scenes of blatant hostility toward Jews. Last year, one of the most disturbing incidents unfolded at the Harvard Business School during a “Stop the Genocide in Gaza” protest, where a pro-Israel student attempting to film the event was reportedly surrounded and assaulted by a crowd chanting, “Shame, shame, shame.”

However, he announced in July that Harvard had reversed its decision, releasing a video in which he declared, “Make no mistake, the reversal of these charges is not a reflection of the good nature of the institution but a demonstration of the power of our organizing. When I rejoin my peers this fall, we must understand our movement is working, that our momentum is growing, and that Palestine will be free from the river to the sea.”

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Matt Lamb

Published: Jan 31, 2025

ANALYSIS: Kendi’s center has significantly scaled back following massing spending with little results. He will now create something similar at Howard University

Professor Ibram Kendi and Boston University will shut down the Center for Antiracist Research on June 30 as the “antiracism” proponent moves to Howard University.

Kendi will start a similar center at the Washington, D.C. historically black university, focused on “advancing research of importance to the global African Diaspora, including inquiry into race, technology, racism, climate change, and disparities.”

The “Institute for Advanced Study” will be “[b]uilt on the highest standards of intellectual inquiry,” according to a news release from Howard.

However, Kendi’s Boston U. center failed to deliver on many promises. The university and center ignored at least twenty requests for comment from The College Fix about productivity during that time. A 2024 analysis from The Fix found the center had been largely quiet in the past year. The scaled back version, following overspending by Kendi, produced little. The university investigated the center and cleared Kendi of any wrongdoing.

The center started off with strong fundraising, including $10 million from former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. It also had the benefit of being started in summer 2020, as Black Lives Matter grew in prominence and corporations and governments focused on “antiracism” and “diversity, equity, and inclusion” principles. Kendi himself did quite well during that time, hauling in $35,000 for 60-minute speeches. A 2021 analysis estimated Kendi had made around $300,000 from speaking gigs, an amount that has likely eclipsed half a million dollars by now.

Following layoffs of about half the staff, which disproportionately harmed racial minorities and thus violated the principles of “antiracism,” Kendi moved to focusing on fellowships.

But The Fix spoke to one “research affiliate” who did not even know she had been accepted for a position until being contacted for comment on what the role entailed.

Boston U. heralded some of Kendi’s work, including the “COVID Racial Data Tracker.” But Kendi and his team did little on that project – rather a team of volunteers from The Atlantic did the work and the publication shut down new data collection in March 2021.

His center existed at Boston U. for five years, after he left a similar project at American University. For the last two years, representing 40 percent of his time there, the center did practically nothing, while Kendi wrote zero academic papers at least during the first three years he was there.

As The Fix reported in Sep. 2024:

 The latest post on the Antiracist Tech Initiative blog was from August 2023, as was the most recent update from the Racial Data Lab. On a page titled “What We’re Working On,” nothing is listed from this year. No policy reports or convenings have been published since 2022, and no amicus briefs have been submitted by the center since 2023. The Model Legislation Project also has not been updated this year. The Antiracist Legal Education Project advertises an event from September 2023 as “upcoming,” while the annual Antiracist Book Festival was not held in 2023 or 2024. A Vertex Symposium, which is also described as an annual event, has not occurred since 2022.

Kendi was quick to accuse his critics of racism when questions were raised about his leadership, even though some of them were racial minorities, such as scholar Saida Grundy.

“I have been disappointed in journalists who report criticisms of a Black leader without asking for evidence to substantiate those allegations,” he told The Daily Free Press. “Racist ideas about a corrupt Black leader running a dysfunctional or toxic organization are so ingrained that reporters don’t feel the need for evidence.”

==

Of course he did. He has no other cards to play because he's a full-blown fraud.

"If you hold me responsible for all the things I did, you're a racist." This is how liars and ideologues like him deflect.

But it would be racist not to hold him accountable, as we do other leaders and managers. There's nothing more racist than saying, well, since you're black we should hold you to a lower standard because we just can't expect that much from you.

What I will say is that Howard University deserves everything it's going to get.

[letterstomyrepresentatives]

Dear President Garber,

I’m writing to thank you for Harvard’s decision to reject the Trump administration’s demands to control how your university governs, hires, and teaches. That decision is more than institutional—it’s deeply consequential for American democracy and for the future of academic freedom across the country.

I work in a university science department. Like many in research and education, I’ve watched with growing alarm as universities and professional institutions face escalating political pressure to fall in line with the administration’s agenda. What’s at stake isn’t just funding—it’s the ability to pursue truth, to teach openly, and to serve the public without political interference.

In recent weeks, I’ve been heartbroken by Columbia’s capitulation and the legal profession’s silence. None of the top ten US law firms signed a brief supporting Perkins Coie out of fear. As Paul Weiss’s chairman noted, some firms even tried to poach clients amid the chaos. In stark contrast, Harvard chose to lead. That decision—to hold the line when others wouldn’t—means everything right now.

The morale in science departments like mine is at a historic low. Faculty, researchers, and students are demoralized. Many are scared. But your stance has had a real impact on us. It’s a reminder that not every institution is going to back down. That solidarity, and leadership, are still possible.

There will likely be more pressure ahead. But I believe Harvard can withstand it—and I want you to know that many of us are ready to help if needed. I would gladly donate to support Harvard’s continued resistance, and I know thousands of others feel the same.

Thank you for giving the rest of us something to hold onto right now. We’re watching—and we’re grateful.

[darkmaga-returns]

The article discusses a troubling trend in American academia concerning the treatment of students who express criticism of Israel. It highlights the recent arrest of Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts University doctoral student, who was abducted by federal agents after co-authoring an op-ed critical of Israeli policies. This incident, which has drawn significant public attention, raises concerns about the suppression of free speech on college campuses, particularly regarding topics related to Israel and Palestine. The author argues that such actions signify a broader assault on academic freedom and a chilling effect on students' willingness to engage in political discourse.

The narrative further outlines a series of similar arrests and intimidations targeting students at other prestigious institutions, including Columbia University. Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate, faced deportation after his vocal opposition to Israeli actions, while other students, like Ranjani Srinivasan, fled the country to escape potential arrest. The article suggests that these actions are not isolated but rather part of a coordinated effort by pro-Israel organizations, supported by the executive branch, to silence dissent and reshape the political landscape of American higher education. This crackdown, the author contends, represents an unprecedented shift in the treatment of political expression within elite universities, where students previously enjoyed relative freedom to voice their opinions.

Moreover, the article critiques the response from university administrations, which appear to capitulate to governmental pressure and the threats of funding cuts. The leadership at Columbia and Harvard has been notably affected, with several presidents resigning under pressure related to their handling of student protests against Israel. The author posits that the funding mechanisms and political landscapes of American universities are increasingly influenced by powerful pro-Israel donors, leading to a climate where academic integrity and intellectual diversity are compromised. This situation contrasts starkly with historical precedents, where universities had been bastions of free thought and political discourse.

Ultimately, the article argues that the ongoing suppression of dissenting voices in academia not only threatens the integrity of American universities but also undermines the country's global standing as a proponent of free speech and human rights. The author highlights that international perceptions of the U.S. are likely to shift negatively if such trends continue, noting that the treatment of students challenging Israeli policies reflects a broader authoritarian trajectory in American governance. The implications of these developments extend beyond individual freedoms, potentially destabilizing the foundational principles of academic freedom and civil liberties in the U.S.

[mariacallous]

The Trump administration, working in coordination with Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency, has gutted a small federal agency that provides funding to libraries and museums nationwide. In communities across the US, the cuts threaten student field trips, classes for seniors, and access to popular digital services, such as the ebook app Libby.

On Monday, managers at the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) informed 77 employees—virtually the agency’s entire staff—that they were immediately being put on paid administrative leave, according to one of the workers, who sought anonymity out of fear of retaliation from Trump officials. Several other sources confirmed the move, which came after President Donald Trump appointed Keith Sonderling, the deputy secretary of labor, as the acting director of IMLS less than two weeks ago.

A representative for the American Federation of Government Employee Local 3403, a union that represents about 40 IMLS staffers, said Sonderling and a group of DOGE staffers met with IMLS leadership late last month. Afterwards, Sonderling sent an email to staff “emphasizing the importance of libraries and museums in cultivating the next generation’s perception of American exceptionalism and patriotism,” the union representative said in a statement to WIRED.

IMLS employees who showed up to work at the agency on Monday were asked to turn in their computers and lost access to their government email addresses before being ordered to head home for the day, the employee says. It’s unclear when, or if, staffers will ever return to work. “It’s heartbreaking on many levels,” the employee adds.

The White House and the Institute of Museum and Library Services did not immediately respond to requests for comment from WIRED.

The annual budget of IMLS amounts to less than $1 per person in the US. Overall, the agency awarded over $269.5 million to library and museum systems last year, according to its grants database. Much of that money is paid out as reimbursements over time, the current IMLS employee says, but now there is no one around to cut checks for funds that have already been allocated.

“The status of previously awarded grants is unclear. Without staff to administer the programs, it is likely that most grants will be terminated,” the American Federation of Government Employee Local 3403 union said in a statement.

About 65 percent of the funding had been allocated to different states, with each one scheduled to receive a minimum of roughly $1.2 million. Recipients can use the money for statewide initiatives or pass it on to local museum and library institutions for expenses such as staff training and back-office software. California and Texas have received the highest allocated funding, at about $12.5 million and $15.7 million, respectively, according to IMLS data. Individual libraries and museums also receive grants directly from IMLS for specific projects.

An art museum in Idaho expected to put $10,350 toward supporting student field trips, according to the IMLS grant database. A North Carolina museum was allotted $23,500 for weaving and fiber art workshops for seniors. And an indigenous community in California expected to put $10,000 toward purchasing books and electronic resources.

In past years, other Native American tribes have received IMLS grants to purchase access to apps such as Hoopla and Libby, which provide free ebooks and audiobooks to library patrons. Some funding from the IMLS also goes to academic projects, such as using virtual reality to preserve Native American cultural archives or studying how AI chatbots could improve access to university research.

Steve Potash, founder and CEO of OverDrive, which develops Libby, says the company has been lobbying Congress and state legislatures for library funding. “What we are consistently hearing is that there is no data or evidence suggesting that federal funds allocated through the IMLS are being misused,” Potash tells WIRED. “In fact, these funds are essential for delivering vital services, often to the most underserved and vulnerable populations.”

Anthony Chow, director of the School of Information at San José State University in California and president-elect of the state library association, tells WIRED that Monday was the deadline to submit receipts for several Native American libraries he says he’d been supporting in their purchase of nearly 54,000 children’s books using IMLS funds. Five tribes, according to Chow, could lose out on a total of about $189,000 in reimbursements. “There is no contingency,” Chow says. “I don’t think any one of us ever thought we would get to this point.”

Managers at IMLS informed their teams on Monday that the work stoppage was in response to a recent executive order issued by Trump that called for reducing the operations of the agency to the bare minimum required by law.

Trump made a number of other unsuccessful attempts to defund the IMLS during his first term. The White House described its latest effort as a necessary part of “eliminating waste and reducing government overreach.” But the president himself has said little about what specifically concerns him about funding libraries; a separate order he signed recently described federally supported Smithsonian museums as peddling “divisive narratives that distort our shared history.”

US libraries and museums receive support from many sources, including public donations and funding from other federal agencies. But IMLS is “the single largest source of critical federal funding for libraries,” according to the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies advocacy group. Libraries and museums in rural areas are particularly reliant on federal funding, according to some library employees and experts.

Systems in big metros such as Los Angeles County and New York City libraries receive only a small fraction of their budget from the IMLS, according to recent internal memos seen by WIRED, which were issued in response to Trump’s March 14 executive order. "For us, it was more a source of money to innovate with or try out new programs,” says a current employee at the New York Public Library, who asked to remain anonymous because they aren’t authorized to speak to the press.

But the loss of IMLS funds could still have consequences in big cities. A major public library system in California is assembling an internal task force to advocate on behalf of the library system with outside donors, according to a current employee who wasn’t authorized to speak about the effort publicly. They say philanthropic organizations that support their library system are already beginning to spend more conservatively, anticipating they may need to fill funding gaps at libraries in areas more dependent on federal dollars.

Some IMLS programs also require states to provide matching funding, and legislatures may be disincentivized to offer support if the federal money disappears, further hampering library and museum budgets, the IMLS employee says.

The IMLS was created by a 1996 law passed by Congress and has historically received bipartisan support. But some conservative groups and politicians have expressed concern that libraries provide public access to content they view as inappropriate, including pornography and books on topics such as transgender people and racial minorities. In February, following a Trump order, schools for kids on overseas military bases restricted access to books “potentially related to gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology topics.”

Last week, a bipartisan group of five US senators led by Jack Reed of Rhode Island urged the Trump administration to follow through on the IMLS grants that Congress had authorized for this year. "We write to remind the administration of its obligation to faithfully execute the provisions of the law," the senators wrote.

Ultimately, the fate of the IMLS could be decided in a showdown between Trump officials, Congress, and the federal courts. With immediate resolution unlikely, experts say museums and libraries unable to make up for lost reimbursements will likely have to scale back services.

[sarkariresultdude]

Fulbright Scholarship Results Are Out – Congratulations to the Awardees!

 The Fulbright Program, hooked up in 1946, stands as one of the maximum prestigious international instructional exchange projects, aiming to foster mutual information between the USA and other nations. Each year, thousands of scholars, college students, and professionals from around the globe are decided on to take part in this program, embarking on possibilities for superior studies, college lecturing, and graduate have a look at in the U.S. The choice technique is pretty aggressive, reflecting this system's commitment to academic excellence and cultural alternate.

Fulbright Scholarship Result Requirement 

Recent Developments in the Fulbright Program

As of March 2025, several noteworthy events have spread out within the Fulbright community:

Funding Freeze and Its Implications

In February 2025, the U.S. State Department initiated a brief pause on spending to study its programs and sports. This decision has drastically impacted programs like Fulbright, Gilman, and Critical Language global scholarships. Consequently, many students who depend upon State Department funding have located themselves stranded, both inside the U.S. And abroad, facing monetary uncertainties. This abrupt investment freeze has affected over 12,500 American college students and professionals presently abroad or scheduled to participate in State Department programs within the subsequent six months. Additionally, extra than 7,four hundred global contributors in U.S.-based applications were affected. 

AP NEWS

2025 U.S.-ASEAN Visiting Scholar (USAS) Program Nominees

Despite the funding challenges, the Thailand–United States Educational Foundation (Fulbright Thailand) introduced the interview results for the 2025 Fulbright U.S.-ASEAN Visiting Scholar (USAS) Program. Four prominent nominees had been decided on:

Professor Dr. Montarop Yamabhai: Professor of Molecular Biotechnology at Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima.

Dr. Orawan Sriboonruang: Knowledge Management Manager on the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization Regional Centre for STEM Education, Bangkok.

Assistant Professor Dr. Piya-on Numpaisal, MD.: Associate Dean on the Institute of Medicine, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima.

Dr. Totsanat Rattanakaew: Agricultural Research Officer, Expert degree, on the Land Development Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Bangkok.

These nominees will continue to the final choice method carried out with the aid of the U.S. Mission to ASEAN in Jakarta. 

FULBRIGHTTHAI.ORG

Fulbright 2025 Cohort Selection in Pakistan

The United States Educational Foundation in Pakistan (USEFP) discovered the choice of the Fulbright 2025 cohort. From 1,a hundred ninety applications spanning a hundred thirty five universities, 88 applicants had been chosen—70 for grasp's applications and 18 for Ph.D. Applications. This cohort's choice underscores the program's willpower to academic advantage and management capability. 

USEFP NEWSLETTER

Understanding the Fulbright Selection Process

The Fulbright selection system is meticulous, designed to pick out applicants who now not handiest excel academically however also reveal ability for leadership and a commitment to fostering mutual know-how. Key components of the selection process encompass:

Project Proposal & Grant Purpose: Evaluators check the nice and feasibility of the proposed undertaking, such as its relevance to the host country and its ability impact.

Applicant Qualifications: This encompasses the candidate's academic and professional report, relevant education, accomplishments, extracurricular activities, and language education if required.

Contribution to the Fulbright Mission: Reviewers don't forget how the candidate and their task will enhance the Fulbright purpose of selling mutual understanding amongst international locations via network engagement and other activities. 

FULBRIGHT ONLINE

Opportunities and Challenges Ahead

The recent funding freeze affords considerable challenges for current and potential Fulbright scholars. The uncertainty surrounding monetary support has left many in precarious conditions, highlighting the need for clean conversation and contingency making plans.

Despite these challenges, the Fulbright Program keeps to provide worthwhile opportunities. For example, the Fulbright U.S. Scholar Program for the 2025-2026 cycle is about to release, presenting over four hundred awards across six world regions. The utility system is scheduled to begin in February 2025, with a closing date in September 2024.