How We Destroyed Community College Education for Generations of Students – and Why We Need a Reset

I went to an opportune lunch to talk about the 2018 disappearance of Arizona Junior College (JUCO) football for financial and funding reasons. Three hours later, I found the real story was Never Just About Football! We were talking about second chances, education, jobs, the minority students that community colleges are trying to reach – and what it might take to bring them back.

Sitting around the table were three candidates for the Maricopa County Community College District Governing Board: John Crow, running At-Large; Ryan Caracciolo, running in District 4; and Susan Winder, running in District 3. They are seeking three separate seats, but they have chosen to campaign together.

On paper, their explanation is fairly simple. Crow brings the business side, as the CEO focused on budgets, efficiency and accountability. Caracciolo brings the professional marketing side, focused on attracting students and growing enrollment. Winder brings the professional education side, with more than three decades as a longtime educator and administrator focused on what happens in the classroom and what students need to succeed.

But that is the résumé version. The lunch told a much more Human Story. We talked – a lot – about bringing back junior-college football and WHY. We talked about its cost, who should pay for it, whether private money should be involved, whether it could increase enrollment, and what measurable results would justify restoring it.

Keep reading

Boston Globe Praised Harvard for Suppressing Free Speech to Save It

The Boston Globe (9/13/26) ran an article contrasting two Boston-area universities’ approaches to campus free speech. Penned by higher education reporter Mike Damiano, the piece reads like an installment of Highlights for Children‘s didactic “Goofus and Gallant” feature, with one school clearly doing it right while the other is letting down the cause of free speech.

Northeastern University plays the role of the loathsome Goofus, with critics remarking that the “school’s leaders have taken a hands-off approach to speech issues since cracking down on a pro-Palestinian protest encampment more than two years ago.”

Meanwhile Harvard, in Gallant fashion,

undertook a multi-year experiment in remaking campus speech norms with top-down reforms, resulting in what students and professors describe as a kind of thaw on a campus where tensions over politics, ideology and speech had thrust it into an acrimonious national debate.

That certainly makes it sound better than Northeastern’s “hands-off approach.” But you have to ask: What did Harvard’s leadership actually do for speech when they put their hands on it?

Well, for one thing, “they have nudged teaching fellows and professors to keep their personal politics out of the classroom.” Huh—telling faculty not to talk about their politics does not actually sound like promoting free speech.

Keep reading

Carnegie Mellon University Associate Professor Under Fire for Disturbing Anti-White Social Media Posts

Uju Anya, an associate professor of second language acquisition at Carnegie Mellon University, is under fire for social media posts attacking White people, and this isn’t the first time.

The Gateway Pundit reported that Anya took to social media to also suggest that the attempted assassination of President Trump was a ” staged ” shooting and the shooter was part of a “stupid show.”

Anya also attacked Charlie Kirk following his murder.

According to Newsweek:

One of the latest flashpoints involves Uju Anya, an associate professor at Carnegie Mellon University, who referred to Kirk as a “s***bag” and said she hoped he would “rot in p***” while participating in online “Kirkiversary” posts marking the anniversary of the conservative commentator’s death.

As criticism mounted, users also resurfaced a number of Anya’s older posts, including a 2021 exchange in which she allegedly told another user, “Die first, white man,” as well as earlier comments celebrating the death of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh.

The recent controversy she has found herself in is a video in which she declares, “These f*cking racist white supremacist pedophile assh*les will not win.”

Keep reading

Medical student research is low quality but spreads nonetheless, study finds

Published research by medical students continues to proliferate despite concerns about the quality of the work, according to a new report.

Why Johnny Can’t Stop Writing: The Boom in Low-Impact, Politicized Medical Student Research,” authored by Do No Harm’s Jay Greene, highlights the proliferation of low-quality medical student research in the past 20 years. The researcher offered potential solutions in original comments sent to The College Fix.

Greene found that in the early 2000s, fewer than 12 publications listed students as authors or co-authors, but in the 2020s, more than 700 publications could claim medical student authorship. 

Additionally, between 2000 and 2006 no more than 17 publications listed a student author per year, but by 2022, 932 publications listed authors as such. 

Much of this research is low-quality and focuses on identity politics.

Greene found between 2000 and 2013, six percent of medical student publications contained at least one of nine preselected “woke terms” in the title or abstract. These terms are: “equity,” “disparities,” “social,” “justice,” “race,” “racist,” “racism,” “diversity,” or “inclusion.”

However, between 2021-2025, the number had risen to 21 percent.

Examples include “Reforming Medical Curricula to support Indigenous Students and Reduce Healthcare Disparities,” “Addressing Health Inequities in the United States: A Case Report on Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Social Determinants of Health,” and “Filling the Gap: Creating a Student-Run LGBT+ Clinging to Address Health Disparities.”

He offered a solution in an email to The Fix: “By returning to objective letter grading, schools would incentivize students to focus on mastering their skill set in the clinical space rather than fluffing their resumes with baseless research endeavors.”

Greene said patients benefit when only high-quality research is being used by medical professionals.

“If they take time from those productive activities to produce lousy research, they will be worse doctors and harm patient outcomes,” Greene told The Fix.

Also, “an increasing volume of lousy research dilutes the quality of medical research, mis-informing both medical students and already-practicing doctors,” the research expert said. “When doctors are increasingly mis-informed […] they will tend to be worse doctors,” Greene told The Fix.

Keep reading

China’s Communist Party Buying Access to US High Schools

The Chinese Communist Party has pursued a decades-long, multilayered strategy to embed its influence in American education, adapting each time federal investigations closed one channel.

At the university level, Confucius Institutes, Chinese government-funded language and culture centers, peaked at 118 in 2017. In August 2020, the Trump administration designated their US coordinating office a Chinese “foreign mission,” and Congress cut off Pentagon funding to host universities. By 2023, fewer than five remained.

However, the K-12 version of the program, Confucius Classrooms, was never subjected to the same pressure. The State Department reported in 2020 that there were about 500, more than the number of university-level institutes at their peak. No equivalent disclosure law or funding threat targeted school districts. A 2023 investigation by Parents Defending Education found that 143 school districts, including 20 near military bases, were still running Confucius Classroom-style programs.

The same pattern has resurfaced in a new form: the Young Envoys Scholarship (YES) program, administered by the China Education Association for International Exchange (CEAIE). The organization states on its Chinese-language website that it is guided by Marxism-Leninism and Xi Jinping Thought and that it “integrates the Party’s work into the entire process of the association’s operations.”

YES has already reached 83 universities and 27 K-12 schools across 30 states, including Taft High School and at least three other Chicago Public Schools campuses. It operates with essentially none of the federal oversight that eventually reined in Confucius Institutes.

Beijing’s objective through YES is blatant. Chinese officials describe it themselves: bring as many young Americans as possible into direct, positive contact with China. Xi Jinping set a target of bringing 50,000 American students to China over five years so that they return as “messengers” of friendship, in the Chicago consulate’s words. According to one participating school official, they will become “multipliers” whose influence will “triple and quadruple” as they carry favorable views of China back into their communities.

The mechanism is emotional and experiential rather than curricular. It includes fully or heavily subsidized trips, personal outreach from Xi Jinping to individual students and schools, staged cultural immersion, and extensive coverage in Chinese state media. As a Parents Defending Education investigation documents, these programs are designed to shape “how youth in the United States view China” before those students are old enough to become policymakers, business leaders, or voters.

Keep reading

University Of Washington Settles Case Against Professor Disciplined For Mocking Land Acknowledgment

Land acknowledgments have become standard at academic and political events, including the opening of the Obama Presidential Library and a recent Michigan Democratic event. While supporters insist it merely shows respect for original inhabitants, critics argue it is the ultimate virtue signaling and is increasingly being forced on both speakers and audiences. One critic is Professor Stuart Reges, who teaches at the computer science and engineering school of the University of Washington. He has now received a settlement from the University of Washington, which spent a significant amount of time and resources in response to his mocking of the school’s land acknowledgment.

We previously discussed the case of Professor Reges, who was disciplined because he refused to post the school’s “land acknowledgment” and instead posted an alternative statement. Professor Reges sued the university and various officials in 2022. Professor Reges has declared “Land acknowledgments are performative acts of conformity that should be resisted, even if it lands you in court.”

The defendants included Nancy Allbritton, the Dean of the College of Engineering at the University of Washington, Magdalena Balazinska, Director of the Allen School, UW President Ana Mari Cauce, and the Allen School’s Vice Director Dan Grossman.

After the university encouraged faculty to add a prewritten “Indigenous land acknowledgment” statement to their syllabi, Reges decided to write his own statement. He has now been told that, while the university statement is optional, his statement is unacceptable because it questions the indigenous land claim of the Coast Salish people.

The school provided a recommended statement for all faculty to post and/or read to their students at the first of every course:

“The University of Washington acknowledges the Coast Salish peoples of this land, the land which touches the shared waters of all tribes and bands within the Suquamish, Tulalip and Muckleshoot nations.”

Professor Reges disagreed with that statement and expressed his doubts to the faculty while also noting that “Magda” did not want the faculty to discuss such reservations on the email system. That may refer to the Director of the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering, Magdalena Balazinska.

Reges’ alternative statement read:

“I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington.”

The labor theory (which I teach) generally refers to John Locke’s theory. In his Second Treatise, Locke laid the foundation for property as a divine gift of God that began in the state of nature, where all was created in common by God. Reges declared that these tribes, indigenous people, “can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land and that the claim of the university land was not sufficiently used or developed to bestow a claim upon the Coast Salish people. That acknowledged group is a broad collection of different groups with ethnic or linguistic associations.”

In his lawsuit, Professor Reges says that, after he stated his own views, the university moved against him.

“On January 4, 2022, the day after Professor Reges’s Computer Science and Engineering 143 class met for the first time, Defendant [Magdalena] Balazinska, Director of the Allen School, sent Professor Reges an email ordering him to remove the statement from his syllabus because it was ‘offensive’ and created a ‘toxic environment.’

Reges noted that the university allowed other professors “to include modified statements in their syllabi that were more consistent with the University’s recommended statement.” The operative point is that “other faculty at the Allen School continue to include land acknowledgment statements in their syllabi that differ from the University’s own statement, so long as they express a viewpoint consistent with the University’s recommended version.”

Keep reading

Dozens of academic papers have references made up by AI – research

Dozens of academic papers have fake references in them that have been made up by AI, according to new research from the University of Auckland.

The study looked at more than 3000 peer-reviewed papers published in the last few years and found 2 percent of them – or 69 papers – had fake references hallucinated by AI.

Some of the references had realistic author and journal names and publication details – but when the researchers went looking for them, they did not exist.

In a research paper, each reference is meant to be a promise, that if anybody wanted to check the evidence a claim is based on, they could. But what happens if that reference does not lead anywhere?

University of Auckland computer science lecturer Ulrich Speidel was one of the co-authors of a research paper which looked at that problem.

“I can remember going through one, where out of I think 29 references in the paper there wasn’t a single one that actually existed. When you look at them initially, they all look – pompous titles, real names for the articles, in some cases real journals.”

They were published papers in fields related to AI in education that had gone through the peer review process and been checked by other academics.

Speidel said they found that online academic database Google Scholar had also fallen victim to the problem.

“If enough papers have referenced a particular fake reference it’ll actually add that to Google Scholar and maked it look as if it’s a real paper. That was a bit of an eye opener.”

The “AI slop” was degrading the quality of science, Speidel said.

“The thing of course is ‘will you trust me as a scientist if that stuff that I read, if that stuff’s possibly made up?'”

In Australia, consulting firm Deloitte last year had to pay back $440,000 to the Australian government for a report which was found to have hallucinated references.

Deloitte later admitted it was written with the help of AI.

Keep reading

Regina University union files grievance over dumpster for wrong-think

The University of Regina Faculty Association has filed a formal policy grievance over the presence of a Just Bins dumpster on campus after reportedly failing to have it removed from university property.

Just Bins, a Regina-based waste disposal company known for its irreverent social media presence and outspoken political commentary, revealed the dispute Monday on X.

“After failing to have a Just Bins dumpster removed from university property, the University of Regina Faculty Association has officially filed a policy grievance over the presence of a Just Bins dumpster on the campus,” the company wrote.

A photograph posted alongside the announcement shows one of the company’s bins positioned outside a university building. The union’s complaint reportedly centres on Just Bins’ public messaging rather than the dumpster’s condition or the service being provided.

The garbage container appears to work just fine. The union simply objects to the opinions associated with the company whose logo is painted on it.

Universities routinely present themselves as defenders of academic freedom, ideological diversity and open debate. Attempting to banish a dumpster because its owner expresses unfashionable views would seem to demonstrate precisely the opposite.

For now, the bin remains on campus, stubbornly performing its intended function while committing the apparent offence of belonging to the wrong company.

Keep reading

When Socialists Start Talking About ‘War in the Streets,’ Believe Your Ears

Nothing says “workers of the world, unite” quite like gathering at a Chicago Hyatt to discuss revolution while actual hotel workers picket outside.

Socialism 2026 attracted thousands of activists over Labor Day weekend for four days of panels on Marxism, abolition, anti-ICE organizing, “collective liberation,” and other subjects unlikely to appear on the agenda at your local Rotary Club.

Then Butch Ware took the rhetoric somewhere darker.

Ware, an associate professor of history at UC Santa Barbara and former Green Party write-in candidate for California governor, told attendees Democrats “cannot be reasoned with” and “must be destroyed.”

He warned that America was approaching “gunfights” and “war in the streets.”

Those aren’t phrases requiring a decoder ring.

From Jonathan Turley:

“You better get ready for … war.” Across the country, radicals are openly planning for the next stage of their movement, and notably, the Democratic establishment is not part of their plans. Despite the talk of a “Big Tent Party,” socialists are riding high on a surge of support and talking purges and revolution.

In Chicago, radicals gathered for a conference on Marxism during what many view as the heyday of socialism in the United States. The Democratic Socialists of America is now larger and more powerful than at any time in our history. Socialist candidates are winning elections across the country as Democratic establishment figures from Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) to Gov. Gavin Newsom pander to the movement.

Speakers in Chicago used the conference to push supporters to the next stage in the movement, including some openly calling for violence and the end to capitalism.

University of California Santa Barbara History Professor Butch Ware said Democrats “must be destroyed” and urged attendees to be ready for “war in the streets.” Notably, in postings on X, Ware has said that candidates such as New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed are too restrained and are being pushed by the establishment “to contain radicalism.”

The professor “of Africa and Islam” whose faculty page is appropriately found under “bware” is the latest radical to dismiss the “Big Tent Party” rhetoric of establishment figures like Schumer. He declared, “The Democrats cannot be reasoned with. They must be destroyed.” There is little subtlety in the message, Ware has explained: “You cannot call yourself a revolutionary and not be talking about training with weapons.”

It is another example of the delusion that establishment Democrats have that they will be able to use these radicals to destroy their political enemies but not themselves.

Ware doesn’t speak for the Democratic Socialists of America. California DSA has criticized him, and its Los Angeles chapter explicitly urged voters not to support his gubernatorial write-in campaign.

Good. Accuracy requires saying so.

It also makes what Ware said more interesting.

Keep reading

‘Misgendering’ is ‘violent,’ West Chester U. LGBT center says

Free speech groups say recent court cases affirm right to not use someone’s made-up identity

It is “harmful” and “violent” to refer to someone by their true sex, according to a guidance sheet from West Chester University’s “Center for Trans and Queer Advocacy.”

“Misgendering” refers to not using someone’s declared gender, as in the case of a man who claims to be a woman or vice versa. Using the biologically accurate language “can be harmful and violent,” the faculty resource guide states.

Likewise, “deadnaming,” or referring to someone by their real name, “can be quite harmful.”

The guidance sheet, called “Faculty Guide to Supporting Trans & Queer Students,” explains how staff should handle trans and queer students. In the document, it goes over many methods and requests faculty members to become advocates by asking “In what ways have you shown up as an advocate? Inside and out of the classroom?” 

Professors are also encouraged to share their pronouns to “normalize” the practice.

“Consider putting pronouns on business cards and/or on your Zoom name. We have a demo for that!” the document states. The center separately offers other resources, including “Trans Joy” coloring books and guidance on name changes.

The public relations team for the university did not respond to an email sent in the past week. The College Fix reached the transgender center by phone on Aug. 26, but it told this reporter it would need a week to look into him.

 The center has not followed up from that phone call or an email sent Aug. 20, asking how misgendering is violence, if professors should be punished for using the wrong gender (as perceived by the student), and how to balance free speech with gender concerns.

However, several free speech experts said the university is making mistakes by instructing faculty about the harms of not using someone’s declared gender.

 The faculty guide could be seen as a suggestion for behavior but “a policy compelling the use of preferred pronouns and names intrudes on the right to private conscience and, in the case of a public university, violates the First Amendment,” Laura Beltz told The College Fix via email.

Beltz, with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said a university could step in if there is a “persistent and targeted use of a student’s non-preferred pronouns or name” if it “amounts to harassment.”

“But absent more, a faculty member’s mere refusal to use a person’s preferred pronouns or name is protected speech,” Beltz said.

She cited the example of Professor Nicholas Meriwether at Shawnee State University. Meriwether “alleged his rights were violated when administrators insisted he refer to a student using particular pronouns.”

As the free speech expert noted, “the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that he had a strong First Amendment interest in refusing to use a student’s stated pronouns, because they carried an ideological message with which the professor disagreed.”

Shawnee State, in Ohio, paid out $400,000 to end the legal battle, as The Fix previously reported.

The Independence Law Center described the guide as “Orwellian.”

Chief Counsel Randall Wenger said if “a public university tells faculty that certain words can constitute violence, censorship and punishment can be recast as protection.”

“It should concern every American when a government institution entrusted with higher education uses its institutional authority to pressure students and faculty toward ideological conformity rather than the pursuit of truth,” Wenger wrote in an email to The College Fix.

He said the guidance could be “used to discriminate against students with sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Keep reading