Search

Practica, internships, and mentorships are vital for the development of capable and productive graduates of preprofessional academic programs, including sports management and sports administration programs. College students with disabilities, including those in sports management and sports administration programs, who are preparing to enter their professional careers, face all of the challenges of entry into the job setting and may also have other issues that add to the difficulty of their transition. Faculty and staff who are in charge of sports management internship programs may find it difficult to provide proper services and accommodations. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief overview of relevant laws and requirements related to students with disabilities, as well as to discuss some of the best practices for providing the accommodations and supports necessary for creating the best educational outcomes for sports administration students with disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two hundred and twenty-five years ago, North Carolina established the nation's oldest public university, choosing as its home a particularly inviting poplar tree in present-day Chapel Hill. Today, UNC-Chapel Hill is part of a sixteen-campus university system known nationwide for its commitment to ensuring that public universities remain financially accessible to the citizens who support them. That commitment is codified in Article IX, Section 9 of the North Carolina Constitution, which requires that tuition at the State's public universities be "as far as practicable . . . free of expense." That clause was first introduced in North Carolina's 1868 Constitution, nearly eighty years after UNC-Chapel Hill opened its doors. Before its imposition, higher education in North Carolina was anything but affordable. After ratification of the 1868 Constitution, tuition at the State's public universities not only decreased, but remained at a steady, low-price for more than a century: $1450 in 2017 dollars, except for years when inflation spiked. This Note argues that Article IX, Section 9 requires the General Assembly to fund higher education such that tuition does not exceed this amount, adjusted for inflation--a standard leaders in Raleigh have failed to meet for nearly two decades. Should legislators fail to heed this constitutional mandate, students could successfully challenge the legislature's refusal to adequately fund higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on promoting college and career readiness (CCR) for all students in the U.S. It mentions about the enactment of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act which mandates education for students with disabilities; enactment of Every Student Succeeds Act which mandates all students are prepared for college and career; and enactment of individualized education program for supporting students in academic tasks.

Since the formation of the American Republic, Americans have maintained a fundamental mistrust of government power. In the Title IX realm, the Obama Administration exacerbated those concerns. In its efforts to enforce Title IX and to reduce sexual misconduct on campuses, the Obama Administration issued a "Dear Colleague Letter" in April 2011 and a follow up Question and Answer document in April 2014, both of which set out OCR's view of the obligations of institutions receiving federal financial assistance under Title IX and its implementing regulations. This 2011 Dear Colleague Letter "explains the requirements of Title IX pertaining to sexual-harassment also cover sexual violence, and lays out the specific Title IX requirements applicable to sexual violence." Although the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter and the 2014 Q & A result in an increased focus on the problems of sexual assault on campus, some scholars have suggested these documents undermine due process. On September 22, 2017, the Secretary of Education released new guidance that revoked both the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter and the 2014 Q & A document. Instead, OCR re-established its 2001 Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance as the guiding light for future assessments of institutional compliance. Further, the Secretary announced her plans to initiate a "rulemaking process that responds to public comment." The proposed rulemaking process will undoubtedly address multiple stakeholder concerns with the approach to sexual misconduct, but one anticipates that due process concerns for public institutions will be near the top of the list of concerns addressed in rulemaking effort. The purpose of this Essay is to set out a vision for what due process in the Title IX sexual assault context should look like. In accomplishing this purpose, the author --drawing on existing case law, policy arguments, and his own experience as a higher education lawyer--proposes a set of due process protections which will equitably balance the interests of (a) Complaining Witness seeking redress for multiple forms of sexual misconduct, (b) Respondents seeking protection against lifelong stigmas arising from unfair campus proceedings, and (c) institutions of higher education seeking to eliminate all forms of educational program discrimination based on sex. This Essay has four parts. Part I examines why Title IX Sexual Assault proceedings require enhanced due process measures. Part II explains why providing enhanced due process to the Respondent does not undermine the institution's obligations to the Complaining Witness. Part III describes the author's vision of what enhanced due process provisions should entail. Finally, Part IV offers some suggestions for private institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article calls for the amendment of the U.S. Higher Education Act of 1965 to incorporate the proposed Report and Educate About Campus Hazing Act (REACH Act). It provides a brief history of hazing and the current state statutes on hazing. It explores the impact of hazing on students and calls for closing a loophole in some states' hazing definitions. It also advocates the establishment of an anti-hazing education program.

Throughout the United States, college enrollment has overwhelmingly increased, reaching its peak in 2010 with approximately twenty million students. Due to the expanded accessibility to attend college through the Department of Education's higher education programs, the ability to attend college is no longer solely for the elite. This rapid growth, however, has created additional challenges. Despite the evolving higher education demand, government regulations and oversight have mostly remained stagnant. Colleges began to capitalize and take advantage of this market, prompting the rise of for-profit colleges. In 2012, about 12 percent of students attended for-profit colleges, as opposed to the 0.2 percent of students about twenty years prior. Although not all for-profit colleges misuse the system, many colleges have been criticized in recent years for predatory and illegal recruiting tactics. The Department of Education is aware of these problems, but continually enables this conduct through lack of oversight and mismanaged federal funds. The students enrolled in these for-profit colleges have little to no recourse within the court system or otherwise after acquiring burdensome debt based on deceptive tactics and unrealistic promises. This Note will argue that students who are negatively impacted by the predatory tactics of for-profit colleges should have a remedy under the theory of estoppel against the government. Although there is a heightened "affirmative misconduct" standard for this claim, the system will likely go unchanged without a direct effect on the government, given its own interest and benefits based on the current structure of the system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on general problem of regulating student financial aid in the U.S. Topics discussed include take of Department of Education on the same; promoting higher education in the country; and enactment of Higher Education Act of 1992 for governing the same. It also mentions about reports from the U.S. Government Accountability Office on the same.

The article offers insight to the for-profit education industry. Topics discussed include history of deceitful recruitment of veterans in for-profit educational institutions; Department of Education's federal educational assistance programs; and enactment of Higher Education Act for the same. It also mentions about Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council curt case.

Institutions of higher education identify "responsible employees" to further their compliance with Title IX. Responsible employees typically report instances of campus gender-based violence to the institution, usually to the Title IX coordinator. Unfortunately, most colleges and universities make virtually every employee a responsible employee. This "wide-net" approach to reporting, sometimes referred to as universal mandatory reporting, produces two categories of related unintended consequences: (1) it weakens the autonomy of victims when they need their autonomy most, thereby undermining their sense of institutional support and aggravating their psychological and physical harm from the assault; and (2) because of these negative consequences, it deters some victims from accessing the help they need and from invoking university processes designed to hold their perpetrators accountable. After describing the drawbacks of wide-net reporting policies, this Article examines whether current law and guidance permits colleges and universities to limit the number of responsible employees. It argues that recent guidance from the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) increases institutional discretion beyond what existed even under Obama-era guidance and allows institutions to move away from widenet reporting policies. Nonetheless, because some troubling language still remains in OCR guidance, this Article urges the Trump administration to inform colleges and universities expressly that they can narrow the number of responsible employees. The Article then describes in detail the components of a legally sufficient and principled reporting policy. The Article identifies key principles that should guide an institution's formulation of policy, discusses which employees should be made responsible employees, and analyzes several tricky categories of employees. To facilitate reporting and to support survivors, the Article recommends that all employees be obligated both to report for a survivor if the survivor wants to report and to offer the survivor access to confidential support services. Several other aspects of reporting policies that deserve consideration are also highlighted. Finally, the Article argues that institutions cannot credibly justify their wide-net policies by invoking concerns about liability. No reliable estimates exist about the relative liability risks attending different types of policies. The purported institutional advantages of wide-net reporting policies, including the simplification of matters for employees and the removal of perpetrators from campus, appear overstated. Moreover, the liability risks associated with wide-net policies, including the increased institutional vulnerability when employees do not report or when students do not want them to report, are typically ignored. The Article concludes by urging colleges and universities to revise their reporting policies to better advance the goals of Title IX. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deepening racial and socioeconomic segregation is producing unequal educational outcomes at the K-12 level, outcomes that are then reproduced in higher education. This is particularly true as rising competition among colleges has led many of them to focus increasingly on measures of merit that correlate with income and as parents and students adjust their behavior in light of those metrics. While existing affirmative action programs at colleges provide some counterweight to this dynamic, they are limited by institutional (and constitutional) constraints. Out of concern for revenue and rankings, many colleges are constrained in the number of students from low-income backgrounds they are willing to admit. Such a limited scope is not inevitable, however. I f colleges were to give a substantial admissions bonus to applicants who had attended K-12 schools with at least a certain percentage of low-income students, higher education could become a force for countering inequality at the K-12 level, instead of reproducing it. College admissions policies serve as a crucial reference point for parents, students, and educators on down through K-12. By rewarding applicants for attending socioeconomically integrated schools, colleges would mobilize the resources of private actors across the country towards integration. The benefits of this would be significant, especially for students from low-income families who would have an increased chance of attending integrated K-12 schools as a result. Such a policy would also help colleges better foster diversity on campuses, as more students would have had prior experience in integrated settings. This Note explores the ongoing problem of K-12 re-segregation, argues that by adopting this policy colleges could work to promote integration, examines how such a policy could best be designed to do so, and addresses why such a policy would be constitutional. At a time when educational inequality is on the rise, there is an urgent need for new affirmative action proposals that can combat segregation and do so within colleges' existing constitutional and institutional constraints. The policy proposal advocated in this Note would do both, interrupting key elements of the present vicious circle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its prominence, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is often misinterpreted and misapplied. This chapter clarifies historical developments, common misconceptions, and modern applications of the law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the historical aspects of political correctness (PC) on American college campuses as of 2017 in relation to the legal aspects of freedom of speech and higher education in the U.S. Litigation involving the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment and American constitutional law is examined, along with the relationships between law, culture, and politics on college campuses nationwide. Anti-PC backlash and college-based academic freedom are assessed.

The article focuses on the issues concerning the increase of federal regulation on higher education. Topics discussed include regulations under two federal acts, the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 and the Administrative Procedures Act, concepts of federalism, separation of powers, and the delegation doctrine and alternative method of regulation that involves giving federal agencies less discretion in rule making increasing cooperative federalism.

The article focuses on several U.S. higher education case law. The cases discussed include Roberts v. Columbia College Chicago on university alleging breach of contract, retaliatory discharge, defamation, and discrimination under Title VII, Razavi v. Walkuski on expelled student sued students for defamation alleging statements made to campus security and Gaff v. Ind.- Purdue Univ. of Fort Wayne on employment termination discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The article focuses on several U.S. court case related to higher education law. It mentions the case Wheatley v. Marietta College wherein students alleging the negligence of college security in place which resulted in rape, Theidon v. Harvard Univ. regarding gender discrimination for professor with denial in tenure and Doe v. The Ohio State University on restraining order and preliminary injunction for lack of jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary proceedings.

The author reflects on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the affirmative action in higher education case Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, and it mentions the author's claim about an urgent need for equal access to a quality education in America. The legality of race-conscious admissions policies at U.S. colleges is examined, along with the strict scrutiny judicial review doctrine and higher education law-related cases such as Grutter v. Bollinger and Hopwood v. Texas.

The article describes changing the retention practice of "At-risk" students in higher education, which include students of color, low income students and students with disabilities. Topics discussed include the universal design for learning (UDL) defined by the Higher Education Opportunity Act, the three-tier approach to UDL implementation and a sample timeline of three years for university wide implementation.

Skin color and diversity are not synonymous. Furthermore, race provides no basis upon which to stereotype individuals or groups, regardless of whether the reasons are malevolent or benign. Affirmative action policies in higher education should focus on the things that individuals have overcome, not the traits that individuals--and groups--cannot change. Currently, the opposite is true, as such policies equate racial diversity with educational diversity, thus precluding sufficient consideration of factors such as family and personal background, life experience, and the overcoming of adversity that would result in true educational diversity. This is not to say that race is irrelevant, as studies have shown that race contributes in part to achieving a diverse student body. It is to say that, by foreclosing a more searching review of every applicant's background, universities achieve, at best, an incomplete form of diversity that undermines, rather than furthers, the goal of creating a diverse and intellectually stimulating classroom environment. This essay proposes that affirmative action programs should reflect a more comprehensive and empirically-sound definition of diversity. To do so, universities should adopt the framework created by the United States Supreme Court when interpreting the Sixth Amendment's jury-trial requirement. Specifically, the Court has held that defendants are entitled to a jury that represents a cross-section of the community, although such crosssections need not mirror a community's racial and ethnic composition. By refusing to construe the cross-section requirement along racial and ethnic lines, the Court has implicitly recognized that a cross-section of the community can be realized by considering individual factors, not immutable characteristics. Affirmative action policies that embrace the concepts underlying the Court's cross-section jurisprudence would achieve a more meaningful type of educational diversity that reflects the various life experiences, adversities, and backgrounds that shape an individual's perspective and worldview. This approach would also recognize that race is neither a proxy for diversity nor a basis upon which to make judgments about individuals. Indeed, until affirmative action programs employ more holistic and individualized admissions practices, race and ethnicity will continue to be as prevalent in modern society as they were during the Jim Crow era. Moreover, it should not matter that, unlike Jim Crow laws, university admissions action policies rely on race and ethnicity for "benign" purposes. The use of race, however well-intentioned, ultimately precludes a truly individualized--and holistic-- consideration of applicants, and prevents universities from emphasizing the content of an individual's character, rather than the color of an individual's skin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For first-generation college students (FGCSs) reconsidering their majors and future occupations, career exploration can also elicit mental health concerns arising from the unique place these individuals hold in their families and the students' reported reasons for attending college. This article provides career practitioners with a glimpse into the mental health concerns and familial issues that can arise for FGCSs during career exploration given the unique background of this population. Strategies for career practitioners to use while working with FGCSs will be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Federal Pell Grant program has made education possible for many Americans. It has also helped establish the norm of public responsibility for widespread access to higher education. This essay reviews the growth of the Pell Grant program over time and its current characteristics. It then details some innovations with the potential to increase the program's effectiveness in increasing student success, in addition to access to postsecondary education. Both the eligibility formula and the application process should be simpler and students should not have to reapply every year. Students should receive timely information and coaching services to help them select institutions and programs of study. Some smaller steps also have the potential to make a significant difference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Higher Education Act (HEA) is due to be reauthorized by Congress and the higher education policy community is working hard to be a part of those efforts. The National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA) plays a unique role in this process, as the HEA contains the legislation behind all of the federal student financial aid programs. As partisan politics infiltrate Washington D.C., NASFAA is working with its members and association colleagues to put forth innovative recommendations to shape and inform the reauthorization process. This paper examines the reauthorization process; highlights NASFAA's specific work, including policy recommendations; and explains how NASFAA utilizes its members and operates within the broader Washington D.C. higher education policy community to influence policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the Task Force on Government Regulation of Higher Education which was established to study and recommend ways to reduce the federal regulatory burden on higher education in the U.S. It was formed at the recommendation of a bipartisan group of Senators led by Lamar Alexander, and comprised of 16 presidents and chancellors from across all sectors of higher education. The article narrates 10 specific policy changes and guiding principles suggested by the task force.

The article focuses on several U.S. court cases related to higher education. The cases discussed include Chandler v. Univ. of Pa. on discriminatory hiring practices, Fisher v. Univ. of Tex. at Austin on equal protection violation in the admissions program at university and Thomas M. Cooley Law Sch. v. Kurzon Strauss, LLP on defamation, interference with business relations, breach of contract and grant of summary judgment in favor of law firm and attorneys.

The article presents cases studies of the European Union (EU) and the U.S. related to increment in role of immigration law in universal higher education. Topics discussed include the U.S. Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2012 for undocumented college students, immigration and structural exchange mechanisms governing cross-national EU Member States and the U.S. Supreme Court case Plyler v. Doe on the role of students to deny funds for undocumented students.

The article focuses on the higher education practices in the U.S. with the laws regarding the professional visas and permanent residence of foreign students. Topics discussed include policy changes to the U.S. immigration system, participating in programs that promote the educational exchange and policy related to the STEM education.

This conceptual study builds an institution-focused, non-Eurocentric, theoretical framework of black college student success. Specifically, the study synthesizes the relevant empirical research on the contributions historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) have made for black student success, leading to an original model that all institutions can adapt to their contexts. Significantly, this is the first HBCU-based theoretical model to appear in the academic literature. The study concludes with several implications for research and practice, including testing the model and using it in institutional planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses several American court decisions in cases involving universities and other institutions of higher learning in the U.S., focusing on legal proceedings which deal with topics such as due process rights, a professor's national origin discrimination claim, and a university student's freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In the 2014 case Romkes v. University of Kansas, an employee appealed the defendant's determination to deny tenure.

On the fiftieth anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, this Article argues for a renewed focus on disadvantage and social mobility in higher education law and policy. When President Lyndon Johnson urged passage of the Civil Rights Act and originally advocated affirmative action, the goals of rooting out discrimination and ensuring social mobility for all Americans motivated him. Over time, these goals receded in law and policy. Courts justified affirmative action on grounds of diversity. More recently, commentators urged consideration of "class-based" affirmative action or advocated policies that favor "low-income" students. Both initiatives can help open up access to selective institutions of higher education. However, neither is a dependable proxy for disadvantage in education. Race-based affirmative action justified on grounds of diversity is a vital tool for ameliorating racial inequality, but it does not necessarily address class-based disadvantage. Class- or income-based policies do not necessarily benefit the neediest students. The demographic makeup of selective institutions of higher education today suggests that neither effort is particularly effective in ensuring social mobility. Campuses are more racially heterogeneous, but largely economically homogenous. If the social mobility objectives of the Civil Rights Act are to be more fully realized, universities must supplement current admissions and aid policies. Today's costly, ultra-competitive, and strategically managed admissions environment makes it even more vital to create pathways for talented students from truly disadvantaged backgrounds to selective institutions. To avoid the crowding out of the neediest students, disadvantage must be identified more precisely and attacked at its roots instead of indirectly. Favorable treatment of first-generation, Pell Grant-eligible students in three areas--admissions, financial aid, and institutional outreach--can facilitate greater access for truly educationally disadvantaged students. Through initiatives focused on these students, colleges can simultaneously tackle social problems related to income, socio-culture, place, and race, advance equal educational opportunity and pursue the national interest in social mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the role of lawyers who work for U.S. colleges and universities. Topics discussed include the importance of practicing preventative law in an effort to stop lawsuits and legal problems before they occur and the importance of problem solving, consensus building, and critical thinking to the practice of higher education law.

The article discusses the campaign to prevent the merger of the Camden, New Jersey campus of Rutgers University-Camden with Rowan University of Glassboro, New Jersey during the early 2010s. The New Jersey state government's support of the merger of Rutgers' Camden campus with Rowan University is discussed. The article also provides the history of Rutgers University's history from the mid 18th century through the early 21st century, including in regard to legislation on New Jersey universities.