Welcome back to The PHENOM Update, our official monthly newsletter where we keep you updated on recent goings on in our campaigns and around the higher ed world!
PHENOM’s UMass-Amherst chapter co-hosts panel about student movements in Asia!
This October 7th, PHENOM, the Asian American Students Association (AASA), the Bengali Students Association (BSA) and the Nepali Students Association (NSA) at UMass Amherst teamed up to host an event highlighting Asian and Asian American student activism and discussing the recent student-led uprisings in Bangladesh and Nepal.
The event featured Richard Chu, UMass-Amherst professor of Asian-American studies Richard Chu, to present on the role of Asian American students in the U.S civil rights movement, as well as his own experience during the 1986 “People Power” revolution in the Philippines. Student speakers from Bangladesh and Nepal spoke about the profound effect of witnessing social unrest, police violence, and oppression in their countries before and during the uprisings.
Their stories were incredibly moving – recounting the fear and horror of repressive backlash as well as pride in their peers for standing up. Speakers highlighted their personal experiences without taking explicit stances on the political situation in these countries. However, their testimony was alike in reflecting the power of student movement and resistance.
During the discussion sessions, groups reflected on current issues in the United States that demand students’ attention. Students were encouraged to think about their own role in the political landscape and what causes they could show up for. Discussion topics on organizing included the role of art and social media in protest, what solidarity looks like, and more.
Cross-group pollination and events like these are important ways to connect with the diverse community at our public colleges, grow the movement, and reflect on current events and their historical context.
A huge shout-out to everyone who attended!
Op-ed: Adjunct Faculty Deserve Better
As part of our campaign to pass the Adjunct Faculty Reform Act (SD.1664/HD.2813) and the Adjunct Faculty Pilot Program (HD.2545),, Communications Chair Liam Rue gives a primer on the severe exploitation of adjunct faculty and what to do about it (read: help us pass these bills!). Rue writes:
Imagine you have two friends, Jim and Tom, and both of them are professors in Massachusetts. They are both 32, both have brown hair, and both love 2000s comedy movies. But there is one crucial difference: Jim is a “tenured” professor, which guarantees him a whole host of privileges from a six-figure salary to paid leave, healthcare and work-life balance. Tom, on the other hand, is stuck as an adjunct professor, and does not have any of these benefits.
Jim’s years of hard work in academia, from getting his bachelors to his PhD, have paid off handsomely since he snagged a professorship on the tenure track. The perks of tenure give Jim the peace of mind to dedicate himself to rigorous research, be the best teacher possible to his students, and live his life to the fullest outside of work.
Tom, on the other hand, does not have the right to any of these benefits as an adjunct professor. Even though Tom did everything right, there are simply not enough professor jobs for all of the brilliant PhDs like him who would be amazing professors. All that is left are “adjunct professor” jobs where you sign up to teach classes that only pay a few thousand dollars per semester, with no job security, benefits or support. It wasn’t always this way.
This story is much bigger than Jim and Tom: it is the story of how professors across America have been transformed from a fairly equal, well-paying profession into the rigidly stratified, exploitative caste system we see on our campuses today.
In other news:
Professors continue to reel from crackdowns on free expression
It has now been one month since the gruesome murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, and professors on campuses across the nation are still reeling from the crackdown on free speech that has followed. According to the Guardian, the Association of American Professors (AAUP) has reported at least 40 professors who have been fired for commentary on Mr. Kirk’s death. Unavailable is the number of professors who have stayed silent for fear of retribution.
A common accusation, as in the case of the dismissal of Austin Peay State University’s Darren Michael, is that the comments promote violence simply for criticizing Kirk as a person. In the case of Michael, he was terminated after merely posting Kirk’s own words. Ironically, Kirk ‘s quote was that gun deaths were worth it for the Second Amendment.
According to John K. Wilson, “There is absolutely no rule at Austin Peay banning people from being insensitive or disrespectful, since any rule like that would clearly violate the First Amendment. And the idea that posting a headline quoting Kirk’s views would somehow justify his murder is insane.”
Meanwhile, Ball State University staffer Suzanne Swieric was terminated for a post where she called Kirk’s death a “reflection of the violence, fear and hatred he sowed” while acknowledging Kirk did not deserve to die. Contrary to endorsing Kirk’s murder, Swieric merely argued Kirk’s own rhetoric that defended violence contributed to his tragic death.
According to Yale Law School professor Keith Whittington, important context for this wave of speech suppression is the “intense pressure” universities feel to placate the Trump administration as it threatens to cut funding for any institutions that do not accede to their demands. Similar to Wilson, Whittington points out professors’ comments are typically protected speech, even if it is a “nonspecific” endorsement of violence.
The irony of this crackdown on professors’ free speech is that Charlie Kirk was praised as a champion of free speech through his frequent debates on college campuses – like the one where he was tragically murdered – yet activists and universities have seized on his death to clamp down on free expression.
An even deeper irony – and perhaps foreshadowing of conservative activists’ latest assault on free speech – is that Charlie Kirk had a long history of trying to rein in free speech he did not like. In 2016, Kirk created a professor watch list that now lists hundreds of professors accused of “left-leaning bias” and has led to these professors being regularly threatened and harassed.
US faces shortfall of 5.3M college-educated workers by 2032
Apparently, a college degree is not quite obsolete just yet. A new report by Georgetown University’s Center for Education and the Workforce has found that the United States labor force will need over 5 million additional workers with at least some post-secondary education. The report finds at least 4.5 million of those 5 million will need at least a bachelor’s degree.
The most highest demand positions requiring degrees are projected to be teachers, nurses, accountants, attorneys, construction workers, engineers, doctors, managers and truck drivers. If current immigration restrictions continue, immigration will be hit particularly hard.
What does the end of Grad PLUS loans mean for higher ed?
One of the most consequential parts of the Republicans’ “One Big, Beautiful Bill” is the provision to end the Grad PLUS federal loan program that has become a mainstay of graduate student lending. The phase out will begin next year.
The decision is troubling because without Grad PLUS loans, students not among the wealthiest Americans will either forgo fulfilling careers entirely or turn to more predatory private loans. But another dimension of this news is the role Grad PLUS loans have played in the current debt crisis.
While, especially as federal loans, Grad PLUS loans are a better option than private loans, their existence is an indictment of our nation’s overreliance on student loans. We should really be focusing on keeping college tuition affordable if not free, not coping with rising college tuition by allowing students to take on more and more debt to afford college.
In fact, not only have Grad PLUS loans enabled the student debt crisis to continue: researchers have found they have played a direct role in worsening our student debt crisis and allowing colleges to raise tuition. Since Grad PLUS loans allowed students to take on much more debt for graduate school, they effectively served as a blank check for money-hungry universities: as students felt comfortable taking on hundreds of thousands in loans, universities simply raised tuition higher and higher since students were on the hook.
Even though 16 percent of graduate students rely on Grad PLUS loans, they account for 32 percent of federal loan disbursements. From the program’s introduction to the 2019-2020 school year, the median debt for Grad PLUS borrowers who graduated more than doubled from $21,800 to $57,800. One study found that, for every extra dollar of federal loans students borrow since the introduction of Grad PLUS loans, tuition increases by 64 cents.
Leaders sound alarm on cuts to new Mass. free community college program
Community college students are now facing cuts to stipends that are critical for their ability to afford college.
Just one year after the passage of free community college in Massachusetts, amid fiscal uncertainty the state legislature did not provide enough funding for stipends students can use to buy books and supplies. According to Bill Heineman, North Shore Community College president, “For many of our students, $100 is the difference between coming or not, or buying a book or just trying to wing it without a book.”
Community colleges have announced that the $2400 in yearly stipends ($1200 per semester) will be reduced to $2000, and completion and emergency grants will be eliminated.
As Hildreth Institute founder member and managing director Bahar Akman-Imboden notes, this comes after the legislature refused to increase funding for community colleges despite promising enrollment increases due to the free community college program. Since August 11th of 2024, there has been a 21.5 percent increase in the number of community college students.
However, “what is actually most worrying is the money is there.” The Fair Share Amendment or Millionaire’s Tax, designed to fund education and transportation by taxing all Massachusetts millionaires, brought in $3 billion more in revenue compared to last year. So why isn’t that handsome chunk of cash being used to help the bright students who need it most.