Governor Lamont Announces Seven New Technology Education Programs at Connecticut’s Public and Private Colleges and Universities

Governor Lamont Announces Seven New Technology Education Programs at Connecticut’s Public and Private Colleges and Universities

Push Releases

Governor Ned Lamont

&#13
07/15/2022

Governor Lamont Announces Seven New Engineering Training Applications at Connecticut’s General public and Non-public Schools and Universities

(HARTFORD, CT) – Governor Ned Lamont today introduced the creation of seven new technology education and learning courses at Connecticut’s community and personal schools and universities. The New England Board of Increased Education and learning (NEBHE) and the Company-Increased Education and learning Forum (BHEF), in partnership with the Connecticut Place of work of Workforce Technique and the Connecticut Section of Economic and Local community Growth, awarded grants to 7 small business-better schooling partnerships in Connecticut as section of an initiative to rapidly increase the competitiveness of the state’s postsecondary establishments and meet expanding company demand for tech capabilities.

The initiative, Tech Expertise Accelerator, was funded by the Connecticut Tech Talent Fund (administered by the Connecticut Division of Community and Financial Development) to shut this skills hole by fostering targeted, significant-accomplishing partnerships involving company and greater education and learning in rising, significant-demand from customers tech capabilities in locations these kinds of as cybersecurity, virtual modeling, program growth, and electronic analytics crucial to organization development in the point out.

The 7 Tech Expertise Accelerator grantees and their focus places are:

  • Quinnipiac College, which will launch an highly developed cybersecurity badging application tailored to industry associates in health care, finance, and tech in central and southern Connecticut.
  • College of Bridgeport, which will deliver a new 12-week system in cybersecurity and information and facts safety tailored to enterprises in Southwest Connecticut’s finance and tech sectors.
  • Mitchell College or university, which will create an accelerated pathway for cybersecurity capabilities personalized to the innovative manufacturing and protection sector.
  • University of Hartford, which will launch an accelerated application growth system for mobile apps personalized to important enterprises in the Better Hartford location championed by worldwide tech firm Infosys.
  • University of New Haven, which will establish an embedded game style and simulation enhancement program leveraging abilities augmented and virtual fact in collaboration with SphereGen, Arsome, and Pleiadian.
  • College of Saint Joseph, which will build a diploma concentration in details analytics personalized to the regional wants of Greater Hartford employers championed by world wide tech agency CGI.
  • Connecticut Condition Faculties and Universities (CSCU), which will launch a dedicated neighborhood of apply to collaborate with corporations by the Capital Location Tech Partnership and the Southwest Connecticut Tech Partnership. CSCU school from two and four-yr institutions will straight operate with just about every partnership to examine positions and abilities demand from customers information and establish a refreshed program with cross-reducing digital expertise developed off of the results of the freshly produced Foundations in Electronic Analytics micro-credential backed by Connecticut enterprises.

“Bringing our educators to the same table as our enterprises has been a priority of our administration given that working day a person,” Governor Lamont explained. “Having businesses articulate what types of techniques they want and doing the job with Connecticut’s ideal instructional establishments to build new plans that set people in substantial-good quality careers is how we are creating a country-major workforce.”

“The Connecticut Business of Workforce Strategy and the Governor’s Workforce Council have formed regional sector partnerships throughout the point out consisting of Connecticut’s prime employers articulating and aligning on the abilities they want to fill their maximum-desire expertise,” Dr. Kelli Vallieres, chief workforce officer of the State of Connecticut, said. “Connecticut wants tech workers to mature our 21st century workforce, and forming partnerships among tech businesses and postsecondary institutions is a seamless way to make sure we are making organic and natural talent pipelines that expand our overall economy.”

“Tech expertise is important to businesses across all sectors in Connecticut,” Martin Guay, vice president of business enterprise progress for Stanley Black and Decker and a co-chair of the Hartford-centered Capital Spot Tech Partnership, a person of the state’s regional sector partnerships, reported. “Tech Expertise Accelerator is helping our state quickly boost its capability to supply the talent essential to retain our firms competitive in Connecticut. By means of this financial commitment, our entire enterprise community will produce the rewards of hiring numerous, perfectly-educated, ready-to-work tech expertise with the precise abilities important for our businesses by way of our state’s globe-class public and unbiased increased instruction institutions.”

“CSCU is thrilled to participate in this effort and is very appreciative of the assets and possibility to commit in the expert growth of our college and workers at the schools and universities,” CSCU President Terrence Cheng said. “Partnering with NEBHE, BHEF, and the regional sector partnerships will enable CSCU institutions guarantee their courses are aligned to enterprise demands and our learners have the tutorial, technical and personalized abilities desired in the IT workforce.”

“The independent faculties in Connecticut are eager to guidance the business group in the point out by producing new packages that offer instruction in large tech, in-desire, competencies,” Jen Widness, president of the Connecticut Convention of Unbiased Faculties, reported. “We are grateful for the partnership with the condition, NEBHE, BHEF, and CSCU in launching the Tech Expertise Accelerator initiative.”

&#13

Twitter: @GovNedLamont

&#13

Facebook: Place of work of Governor Ned Lamont

&#13
&#13

Top US universities accused of illegally limiting financial aid | Education News

Lawsuit alleges 16 main US universities including Yale and Georgetown broke antitrust regulations by employing a shared methodology to ascertain university student money aid.

Yale College is among a lot more than a dozen larger training institutions in the United States that are becoming sued for allegedly breaking antitrust legal guidelines and unfairly limiting economic assist awards for students, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported (paywall) on Monday.

The lawsuit was filed in federal courtroom in Illinois by attorneys representing 5 former students who attended some of the 16 institutions named the complaint, in accordance to the WSJ.

The fit pivots on the thorny issue of how universities figure out a student’s capability to pay college fees, which have achieved astronomical heights in the US and fomented a college student financial debt disaster.

The go well with statements that the universities unlawfully employed a shared methodology to identify monetary support awards mainly because the establishments sometimes weigh candidates’ capability to pay out for their greater training, mentioned the WSJ.

Universities in the US are permitted to collaborate on help award formulation, but only if they observe so-identified as “need-blind” admissions that don’t just take into account a student’s skill to fork out when identifying who receives in and who does not, the WSJ reported.

The lawsuit is searching for damages as perfectly as a everlasting close to the establishments performing together to compute money require and decide the dimensions of help deals that candidates are awarded.

Faculty admissions in the US are deeply opaque. Few candidates close up paying out the complete sticker value for tuition, but assist packages can fluctuate drastically.

Some 43.2 million People in america have student bank loan personal debt, in accordance to the Schooling Information Initiative, which destinations the complete total of student financial loan personal debt remarkable in the US at $1.75 trillion.

The lawsuit can take intention at some of the most prestigious institutes of greater instruction in the place.

In addition to Yale, other universities named in the lawsuit involve Georgetown University, Northwestern College, Brown College, the California Institute of Know-how, the College of Chicago, Columbia University, Cornell College, Dartmouth Higher education, Duke University, Emory College, the Massachusetts Institute of Technologies, the University of Notre Dame, the University of Pennsylvania, Rice College and Vanderbilt College.

According to the WSJ, legal professionals declare that much more than 170,000 undergraduate college students who attended the colleges named in the lawsuit and obtained partial monetary support dating back again up 18 yrs could be eligible to join the match as plaintiffs.

Higher education leaders discuss building resilient universities in Asia at QS APPLE Conference

HONG KONG SAR –News Immediate– Hong Kong Baptist College

HONG KONG SAR – Media OutReach – 2 November 2021 – Distinguished higher schooling leaders in the Asia-Pacific acknowledged at the Quacquarelli Symonds Asia-Pacific Professional Leaders in Instruction (QS APPLE) 2021 Meeting that the strategic course of transdisciplinary education and learning and research is elementary to the development of bigger education and learning in the area, and that universities need to develop into much more resilient to cope with technological progress and uncertainties in the submit-pandemic era.

The Presidents Panel of the QS APPLE 2021 Meeting featured greater education and learning leaders in the region together with (clockwise from best remaining) Professor Alexander Wai, President and Vice-Chancellor of HKBU Professor Lily Kong, President of the Singapore Administration College Professor Joonki Paik, Provost and Government Vice President of Exploration of the Chung-Ang College in Korea Professor Yang Bin, Vice President and Provost of Tsinghua University in mainland China and Professor T.G. Sitharam, Director of the Indian Institute of Engineering, Guwahati as panelists and Mr Anton John Crace, Editor & Programme Designer of QS, as the moderator.

The sector leaders, who joined the Presidents Panel with the theme “Making resilient universities for tomorrow: An Asian standpoint” yesterday (1 November) at the QS APPLE 2021 Convention, also agreed that artificial intelligence (AI) will empower each educators and college students to cope with foreseeable future instruction and workforce developments.

The QS APPLE 2021 Convention, hosted by Hong Kong Baptist College (HKBU) and co-hosted by Prince of Songkla University in Thailand, is currently being held nearly from 1 to 3 November with the concept “Future Rebalance: Emerging developments and workforce in the Asia Pacific”. The conference options a lot more than 80 distinguished speakers from earth-primary universities and organisations, and the programme includes keynote speeches, debates, panel conversations and case studies that mirror the alternatives and trends in instruction in the Asia-Pacific region.

In his opening remarks at the convention, Professor Alexander Wai, President and Vice-Chancellor of HKBU, pointed out that higher instruction is in the midst of an enjoyable transformation introduced about not only by the pandemic, but also the amazing developments occurring in AI and the technological innovation sector. He mentioned that in this speedy-evolving earth, we need to have to race towards time: “Education is the critical to adapting to new systems, and universities will play a important part in closing an imminent competencies hole by enabling their college students to acquire transferable competencies together with technological skills.

“Universities must sow the seeds of systemic adjust to nurture cultures that emphasise care, collaboration and community engagement if we are to enjoy the harvest of transdisciplinary investigation – a abundant yield where by scientific rigour, societal impression and broader engagement collide,” he reported.

Ben Sowter, Senior Vice President of QS Intelligence Device, reported: “As a consequence of new issues confronted, and largely adapted to, by universities, the cat is actually out of the bag – universities can adjust and they can do it quickly. On what other difficulties must they following target their collective may? The principal reason of this conference is not merely to sustain the conversation, but to evoke motion. Outside of motion universities may possibly choose to fortify their possess resilience as institutions, to what they can do to augment ours as a species.”

The Conference’s Presidents Panel featured bigger training leaders in the region, including Professor Alexander Wai of HKBU Professor Lily Kong, President of the Singapore Management University Professor Joonki Paik, Provost and Govt Vice-President of Research of the Chung-Ang College in Korea Professor Yang Bin, Vice-President and Provost of Tsinghua College in mainland China and Professor T.G. Sitharam, Director of the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, as panellists.

The panellists shared their visions and knowledge on how we can develop resilient universities in the Asia-Pacific area that can assistance learners prosper in the experience of an uncertain long run that has been brought about by current fast technological enhancements and the COVID-19 pandemic. The significance of both of those natural and social sciences, as found in transdisciplinary study in phrases of addressing grand worldwide worries, was also ascertained.

“At HKBU, we foster transdisciplinary exploration with a concentration on three parts. The 1st one particular is wellness, and it includes well being, foodstuff, drug discovery and Chinese medication. Another area is artwork-tech, which embraces visualisation systems for standard art background and tradition. All these locations are driven by technologies together with AI and major facts, which is our 3rd place of concentration. We strongly consider that these are the places which will develop students’ resilience and get ready them for an unfamiliar potential,” said Professor Wai.

The Panel discussion also touched on their encounter of integrating AI into education programmes, strengthening the AI abilities of college students for the potential entire world of get the job done, and techniques to improve internal administrative efficiencies.

Make sure you take a look at the formal site of the meeting (https://qsapple.org/) for the complete agenda and other facts about the celebration.

Make contact with Aspects

Kevin Lau from the Communication and Community Relations Workplace

+852 3411 5262

kevinkflau@hkbu.edu.hk

Firm Web site

https://www.hkbu.edu.hk/

Perspective supply version on newsdirect.com: https://newsdirect.com/news/larger-schooling-leaders-examine-making-resilient-universities-in-asia-at-qs-apple-conference-328083833

Australian Universities Are Finance Investors With a Side Hustle in Education

In November 2019 the former vice-chancellor of the University of Melbourne Glyn Davis made a statement to the Age defending his record from 2005 to 2018. In an attempt to justify the massive expansion of casual work, record levels of professional staff sackings, spiraling workloads and wage theft, Davis compared Australian universities with the mining industry. The resources sector was thriving on a multibillion-dollar boom driven by exports to Asia; thanks to international students, university revenue was also booming.

As Davis noted, booms inevitably go bust. As a result, he cautioned prudent university executives to “invest in things that will matter into the future.” Thanks to the pandemic, Australian universities are now in a deep crisis. The boom has turned bust, and the sector is facing a crisis.

When Davis said that universities should invest in things that matter, he meant more buildings. During the neoliberal era, the massification and marketization of Australian universities accelerated dramatically, funded primarily by cash fees paid by international students. This process was set off by reforms introduced by Labor prime minister Bob Hawke in the late 1980s deregulating international students’ fees. Driven by market competition, international students now pay four times as much as their Australian classmates.

Flush with cash and intoxicated by easy money, universities invested in towering edifices of increasing size, splendor, and superficiality — all intended to attract yet more international students.

The decade prior to the pandemic was the “roaring 2010s.” Between 2008 and 2019, income generated from international students studying in Australia rose from $19 billion to $37.6 billion. During this time, universities did not just build to keep pace with rising demand. A Commonwealth government report from 2015 showed that in three years, the universities’ student load had grown by 8 percent and floor space needs by 5 percent. At the same time, the value of university buildings had grown by 23 percent.

By his own admission, Davis did not value or invest in university staff. Melbourne University alone employed some 10,000 workers in 2019. As Davis explained to the Age, “What you do not want to do is load up the institution with expensive permanent staff . . . later this will be a significant problem.”

Davis is no maverick. His view represents the outlook of Australia’s class of academic CEOs, for whom it’s an article of faith that “human expenses” must be kept “soft.” By “soft,” they mean “easy to cut” should international student revenue drop. The result has been the dramatic growth of insecure employment.

When Davis left Melbourne University, seven in ten university workers were insecurely employed. This, too, was emblematic of a broader trend. In the decade prior to the pandemic, the “University Five” — the billionaire institutions Monash University as well as the Universities of Sydney, Melbourne, New South Wales, and Queensland — outstripped their competitor mid-tier institutions. Collectively, they enjoyed a revenue of $11.8 billion  from a total asset base of $28.8 billion (in 2018 dollars). At the same time, precarious university contracts at the University Five ballooned.

Meanwhile, Australian university executives paid themselves monstrous salaries that exceed those of vice-chancellors at like-sized institutions overseas. Indeed, the bloated remuneration of executive staff at Australian universities has allowed Coalition education minister Alan Tudge to make them a scapegoat for the problems of the sector overall. To contain the public-relations fallout, vice-chancellors have agreed to a “Chancellor’s Code” pegging their salaries to those earned by senior public servants.

In April 2020, prime minister Scott Morrison told international students to “go home.” Between then and the end of the 2021 financial year, nearly 100,000 international students will have left Australia, each taking around $60,000 from the Australian economy. It is unclear when or if they will return. This is in large part because Australia has remained shut to international arrivals, even as other similar education destinations have reopened, including the UK, Canada, and the United States. Many international students who chose to study remotely in their home countries or defer their studies indefinitely are now contemplating quitting Australian universities altogether.

While the vice-chancellors saw the need to plan for a possible drop in international student revenue, their strategy of investing in buildings was not quite so prudent. The onset of the pandemic immediately disrupted the universities’ program of accumulating fixed capital (as opposed to the variable capital of staff). By June 2020, just three universities had frozen capital works projects worth $800 million.

Idle capital — buildings included — loses its value. Consequently, investment and finance firms are eying university campuses full of freshly constructed buildings, bereft of students and staff. Investment consultant firm Ernst & Young Australia has identified Australia’s public universities as a potential opportunity for profiteering. They gleefully predict:

Our universities cannot rely on ever increasing inflows of domestic and international students to pay the bills, with student levels unlikely to return to 2019 levels as the sector continues to reel from the pandemic.

In the eyes of finance, all those buildings and land holdings are “lazy capital.” If the universities are compelled by ongoing revenue loss to sell low, it’s an opportunity for easy profit.

The upshot is that Australian universities are now effectively experiencing a profound devaluation crisis. Having outlaid massively on capital works budgets, the universities have effectively converted decades of revenue generated exporting higher education to Asia into fixed, frozen capital. However, as Marx argued, fixed capital cannot generate new value without labor to produce commodities that can then be sold.

This is to say, university managers are presiding over capital reserves that are incapable of producing profits and are losing their value. If this continues, they will be forced to sell — the universities’ fixed capital reserves will melt into the air.

Universities are supposedly not-for-profit institutions. Why, then, should they be subject to a crisis of unprofitability?

Well before the pandemic, the universities had remodeled themselves along business lines. By 2013, many universities had begun to reinvest surpluses generated from student fees in financial assets. For example, in 2019, New South Wales’s public universities held a total of $5.09 billion in financial assets. Victorian universities similarly hold significant financial investments. Thanks to deliberately misleading accounting, universities carefully quarantine their financial assets from “operational budgets.”

Neoliberal budget cuts and deregulation dating back to the 1980s forced Australia’s universities to reorganize along market lines. This process was often spearheaded by managers recruited directly from the finance sector. For example, Allan Tait is the chief operating officer at Melbourne University. He was previously a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers, specializing in privatization, mergers, and acquisitions.

Today, the marketization of Australian universities is all but complete. Among university executives, neoliberalism is hegemonic. According to a leaked 2020 executive-level budget intended for chancellery staff and deans, the University of Melbourne intends to pursue “profitable revenue sources to increase self-reliance.”

Neoliberal university managers have pursued a three-pronged strategy. They have imposed austerity budgets on university faculties and accumulated capital assets on the world’s financial markets. Meanwhile, they cry poor to unmoved governments in the hope of securing federal funding. The incoherence of this approach is partly responsible for the universities’ failure to gain pandemic income support. To the business representatives of the Coalition, universities are unprofitable firms.

Indeed, financial capital has long since broken down university gates. According to the same leaked 2020 budget, Melbourne University is planning to spend a further $4.23 billion on capital works over the next ten years. $1.15 billion of this total is to be financed by debt, which will fund the huge Fishermans Bend precinct development. Or take La Trobe University, which fired 1,200 employees in 2020. In 2021, La Trobe fired yet more staff while expanding its debt from private lenders from $170 million to $345 million

Understood in economic terms, neoliberalism was a government-led program that aimed at resuscitating profits after the “stagflation” crisis of the mid-1970s. To achieve this, governments privatized and deregulated sectors formerly quarantined from the market.

Australian universities are an example of this, albeit a somewhat atypical one. This is because the Labor Party initiated  the neoliberalization of universities in Australia in the 1980s. Prior to this, as in most developed countries, Australian universities’ capital works were funded by an operating grant that met operational expenses and capital funding for buildings and facilities. Universities won funding through a bidding system, with final decisions made by the government of the day.

The Dawkins reforms introduced by Labor PM Bob Hawke changed this. In 1994, financing decisions on capital works were deferred to the universities themselves. As a result, just as international student revenue began to boom, university executives became their own property developers.

Since the 2008 global financial crisis, the Commonwealth government has steadily withdrawn from its obligation to fund university capital works. Between 2010 and 2017, federal expenditure for university capital grants fell by more than a billion dollars. Then, in 2019, Scott Morrison’s Coalition government dealt a death blow to public capital grant funding for universities by abolishing the dormant Education Investment Fund, transferring its revenue into a fund for disaster relief.

This combination of successive cuts to public funding and the neoliberal logic of profit-seeking led universities to look for new ways to accumulate capital and generate profits. This is why they have taken part in a process that Marxist geographer David Harvey calls “mindless, stupid urbanization.”

This has seen universities borrow billions of dollars to finance massive redevelopment projects — like the one at Fishermans Bend. In addition to attracting student fees, these are intended to secure “flows of value” to the “enterprise” by renting out shops and amenities, attracting public-private partnership funding, and selling research to big business. University executives also justify the investment on the presupposition that rising real estate values will protect their assets. However, as university revenues collapse, it is increasingly likely that finance capital will be the ultimate beneficiary.

Before Glyn Davis left the Melbourne University vice-chancellor’s residence, he made sure a new building bore his name. Unused and empty for going on eighteen months, the Glyn Davis Building is spacious, melancholy, and a synecdoche for the crisis of Australian universities.

Designed by an American architectural firm, its imposing frontispiece — a former Collins Street bank façade — gazes across quiet grounds toward an empty student union house. It houses the Melbourne School of Design, and is profiled by the university as “a tool for understanding architecture.” It is also a tool for understanding the hubris and fate of the neoliberal era of universities in Australia.

In 2012, seven years into his term as vice-chancellor, Glyn Davis penned an appraisal of Australia’s universities for the literary magazine Meanjin. Given that Davis amply padded it with poetic allusion, he may appreciate a nod to Percy Bysshe Shelly’s “Ozymandias.” The poem describes a long-forgotten king who believed that grand architecture could sustain his legacy eternally. Among the sand-covered, monumental ruins of his long-forgotten empire, the narrator discovers a pedestal bearing the inscription: “Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!”

Australia’s neoliberal university managers are latter-day Ozymandiases, presiding over monuments to the wastefulness and irrationalism of the market. The only solution is to return the universities to a fully publicly funded, non-market model — and to fire the generation of managers who are responsible for this mess.