There is a need to inform adolescents about the lethal dangers of fentanyl use

 

Fentanyl is involved in at least 75% of adolescent overdose deaths,¹ often because it is added into other drugs such as counterfeit pills. Rates of overdose mortality among adolescents doubled from 2019 to 2020 and have remained elevated since.^1,2 As a result, drug overdoses are now the third leading cause of death among US youth.³ In 2023, an average of 21 US high school–aged youth died of an overdose each week, approximately the size of a typical high school classroom.^1,4

Although public awareness is a central component of current strategies to prevent overdoses,^5-9 the proportion of US adolescents who perceive great risk of harm from fentanyl use is not known. This study addresses this gap by presenting, to our knowledge, the first nationally representative estimates of perceived risk of fentanyl use among US 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-grade students. This information is important to assess whether additional public awareness efforts are needed, and to identify demographic groups that may warrant targeted prevention strategies going forward.

In this cross-sectional survey study of 3820 students in the 8th, 10th, and 12th grades, the majority (52.2%) of 8th-grade students did not attribute great risk to experimental use (1 or 2 times) and 33.5% did not attribute great risk to regular use. These percentages were significantly greater for older adolescents, although in the 12th grade 30.2% did not attribute great risk to experimental use and 15.2% did not attribute great risk to regular use.

Results of this study suggest that there is a need to inform adolescents about the lethal dangers of fentanyl use.

Full study

Resilience training for children who stutter

 For many children who stutter, one of the biggest challenges to overcome is not the stuttering itself. Teasing, bullying and persistent worry about negative social reactions can affect participation at school and in their social life, said Gregory Snyder, associate professor of communication sciences and disorders.

In a study published in the Journal of Fluency Disorders, Snyder and Ole Miss graduate Emily Williams Thornton examined whether a resilience-focused program could address these challenges.

"As a child, I was told, 'If you can't talk fluently, don't talk at all,'" Snyder said. "When children hear messages like that, they can carry them into every speaking situation.

"Instead of focusing on what they want to say, they may begin to constantly monitory their speech, anticipating judgement and deciding whether speaking is worth the risk."

That mentality can make speaking even harder, he said.

"That's where the idea of resilience comes in," he said. "Resilience is not an instruction to accept bullying or to make a child responsible for other people's behavior.

"It gives children practical ways to regulate emotion, respond to unkindness, ask for support, mentor others, and continue participating in school and social life."

Snyder's research has shown that stuttering is a neurological condition that can reveal itself in handwriting, sign language and other nonspoken forms of communication.

Some 3 million adults in the United States stutter, according to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. Around 5% of children experience a period of stuttering, and about 1% of the population has persistent stuttering, according to the Stuttering Foundation.

"We know from research that these children are reporting higher rates of bullying, teasing and anxiety related to their speech," said Thornton, who graduated in 2024 with a master's degree in communication sciences and disorders. "Then we see the cycle that quickly establishes: If you're made fun of for your speech, then you'll start to overthink or second-guess everything you have to say in public.

"That creates pressure to speak a certain way, which can actually influence how you do speak, and then either you exhaust yourself trying to avoid stuttering or you open yourself up to additional potentially negative attention by speaking and inevitably stuttering."

Over six weeks, Snyder and Thornton led a team that delivered 12 live online sessions to six children ages 8 to 12. The lessons were loosely adapted from a character education video series from resilience educator Brooks Gibbs and addressed coping strategies, emotional regulation, realistic optimism, empathy and self-advocacy.

Gibbs provided the material free to the research team and encouraged them to adapt it to the pilot program.

"His contribution provided a strong, developmentally appropriate foundation," Snyder said. "We were then able to reconstruct the material around the communication situations children who stutter face, including teasing, classroom participation, self-advocacy, knowing when to seek help, and how to help and mentor others."

At the end of the study, more than two-thirds of the students showed clear improvement in resilience. A larger study is needed to verify results, the researchers said.

Resilience work is not about getting a child to hide stuttering or treating peer mistreatment as the child's responsibility," Snyder said. "It's about helping children stay engaged, recognize when they need support and respond to difficult moments with empowerment, self-advocacy and self-respect."

Because the program was delivered through telepractice, the researchers were able to recruit students from Mississippi and across the country. Modeling the program to a digital platform means it can be an accessible addition to speech therapy, Thornton said.

"It seems to be another great tool for the therapeutic toolbox," she said. "Some kids will have no inhibitions about their stuttering and will not care an iota about what peers or anyone else may say to them about it, and for those, they may not have much to gain from this kind of treatment.

"For others, it will matter a lot. The majority of children will probably fall somewhere in the middle of that spectrum. Resilience training may help those in the latter two categories figure out how to navigate life in the classroom and beyond."

---

Journal

Journal of Fluency Disorders

DOI

10.1016/j.jfludis.2026.106216 

Youth experiencing educational opportunities at all ages is the ideal scenario

A new study led by a Boston College researcher found that experiencing educational opportunities in all stages of childhood and adolescence is the best predictor of higher educational attainment and earnings for disadvantaged American youth, as opposed to the impact of learning access during any single phase.

The findings, published in the June 30, 2026, issue of Educational Researcher, point to the critical value of educational opportunities for children from low-income households across their formative years, an alternative belief to the widely held viewpoint of the exceptional importance of exposure during early childhood. 

“We found that experiencing educational opportunities in all phases — early childhood, middle childhood, and adolescence— is the ideal scenario,” said Eric Dearing, principal investigator and a professor in Boston College’s Lynch School of Education and Human Development's Counseling, Development & Educational Psychology department. “Experiencing just one educational opportunity in each stage increased a child’s odds of graduating with a four-year degree by more than threefold.”

The researchers utilized the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development’s Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development — a 26-year longitudinal study of educational opportunity — with an exclusive focus on 226 children born into low-income households. They examined this cohort’s educational attainment and earnings at age 26 as a function of when they experienced educational opportunities, observing both the unique predicative power of opportunities accrued within the three developmental stages, and the additive predicative power of opportunities across stages. 

For early childhood, opportunities included living in an enriching home environment, attending a high-quality childcare facility and/or pre-school, or residing in a socioeconomically advantaged neighborhood. For kindergarten through fifth grade, did they receive high quality elementary school instruction, and participate in organized afterschool activities in addition to an enhanced home and neighborhood?  For adolescence, did they experience upward family economic mobility in addition to the other positive factors? 

According to the researchers, educational opportunities in each development stage demonstrated positive and statistically significant associations with achieving education beyond high school.

“Opportunities in early childhood and adolescence predicted increases in the probability of going beyond high school to gain some college education or a two-year degree, and opportunities in both early and middle childhood predicted increases in the probability of completing a four-year degree or more education,” noted Dearing and his co-investigators Henrik Daae Zachrisson, professor of educational sciences at the University of Oslo; and  University of California, Irvine School of Education Associate Professor Andres S. Bustamante, and Chancellor's Professor of Education Emerita Deborah Lowe Vandell. “While less than 50 percent of low-income children who experienced none of these opportunities in any stage was likely to pursue education beyond high school, this percentage was greater than 60 percent for those with just one opportunity during at least one stage.” 

Furthermore, more than 80 percent of disadvantaged children who experienced at least one opportunity in each of the three stages were likely to pursue education beyond high school, with approximately one-third of these children earning a four-year college degree. 

 “These correlational findings are among the first to point to the importance of educational opportunities during each development stage for outcomes in adulthood,” said Dearing, who also serves as the executive director of the Mary E. Walsh School for Thriving Children at Boston College. “We believe these results can help inform the public about what we, as a society, should expect from educational policies that target a single state of development versus strategies that provide more opportunities for disadvantaged children throughout their foundational years.”

Scholars examine how faculty define rigor in online college courses

X

LinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

University of Phoenix College of Doctoral Studies announces the publication of a new article by scholars Jennifer L. James, Ph.D., Karen Myers, DNP, and Olivia Miller, M.A., in the Journal of Educators Online. The article, “Studying Faculty Perceptions of Rigor in Online College Courses: Compromising or Accommodating? A Literature Review,” examines how faculty perceive academic rigor when teaching, grading and managing online courses for nontraditional students.

The systematic literature review used the PRISMA 2020 method to organize peer-reviewed literature published from 2018 to 2023. The authors examined faculty perceptions of online teaching rigor before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, including perceptions related to course management, academic integrity, student engagement, assessment practices, technology and institutional support.

“Rigor in online education should not be reduced to whether a course is hard or whether faculty make accommodations,” said James, lead author and research fellow in the University of Phoenix College of Doctoral Studies. “Our review suggests that rigor is shaped by course design, assessment practices, faculty preparation, student engagement and the realities of teaching nontraditional students online. When institutions support faculty with clear expectations, training and resources, rigor and responsiveness can work together rather than compete.”

Key findings based on five main themes in the literature reviewed

The literature review found that faculty perceptions of rigor in online courses are shaped by multiple factors, including course design, student engagement, academic integrity concerns, technology access, workload and professional development. The article identifies five main themes in the literature reviewed:

• Experience with online teaching: Faculty varied in their comfort with online teaching and technology, with some reporting opportunities to learn new tools and others noting technical challenges and increased workload.
• Perceived effectiveness of online learning: Faculty perceptions were mixed, with some studies indicating online learning outcomes could equal or surpass face-to-face courses, while others reflected concern that online learning may be less effective in some contexts.
• Challenges and support needed: Faculty reported challenges related to technology, broadband access, workload and the need for professional development and institutional support.
• Benefits of online teaching: Faculty recognized benefits including flexibility, accessibility, opportunities to share materials and new ways to engage students.
• Future of online education: Many faculty indicated online and blended learning would continue to grow after the pandemic, while also noting the need for clearer expectations and sustained support.

The authors note that despite extensive research on academic rigor for students, there is less common ground on how faculty perceive the challenges of facilitating online courses for nontraditional students.

The study also points to areas for future research, including how deadline extensions affect faculty workload and perceptions of rigor, how faculty approach student requests to resubmit assignments, and how faculty manage emotionally challenging online course facilitation. The authors recommend further examination of student perceptions of rigor in online classes and the instructor’s role in shaping student expectations.

The publication contributes to broader research on online higher education at a time when institutions continue to evaluate how course quality, academic integrity, flexibility and student support intersect in digital learning environments.

The full article, “Studying Faculty Perceptions of Rigor in Online College Courses: Compromising or Accommodating? A Literature Review,” is available in the Journal of Educators Online, 23(1), at https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2026.23.1.22.

Article in The Geography Teacher: Awe-Inspired Learning and Connection Through Geography

The article, titled “The Overview Effect and Sense of Place: Awe-Inspired Learning and Connection Through Geography,” examines how awe and sense of place may influence how learners engage with and interpret geographic concepts, with implications for instructional design in online and classroom environments.

What is the overview effect and why does it matter for learning?

The article explores the “overview effect,” a cognitive shift described by astronauts viewing Earth from space, characterized by a heightened sense of interconnectedness, perspective and reflection. Building on this concept, the authors examine how experiences of awe, often prompted by scale, landscape and environment, may open attention, expand thinking, and support how learners process new information.

The paper situates these ideas within geography education, suggesting that place-based and visually grounded learning experiences may help students connect abstract concepts to real-world environments while strengthening their sense of place.

Our research highlights the power of a simple show-and-share discussion activity,” said Kelly. “Students explored awe-inspiring landscapes and then shared places that were meaningful to them. Those personal stories and images created opportunities for reflection, strengthened students’ connections to environmental topics, and helped bring a sense of place into the online classroom. We hope this provides a model that other educators can use to foster engagement and connection in online learning environments.”

The authors also discuss how awe-informed approaches may support curiosity and reflection, helping learners recognize gaps in understanding and integrate new knowledge with existing perspectives.

Key themes of the article include:

• Examination of the overview effect as a framework for understanding perspective shift and learning
• Exploration of awe as a factor that may influence attention, curiosity and conceptual understanding
• Consideration of sense of place as a meaningful element in student connection to course content
• Insights into how intentional instructional design may incorporate these concepts in educational settings

Kelly is a published researcher with more than 20 years of experience in science and mathematics education. Her work focuses on translating STEM education research into practice in higher education settings. She has dedicated her work to scaling and sustaining research-based practices in science and mathematics education. Kelly earned a doctorate in curriculum and instruction with a specialization in science education and a Master of Science in materials science and engineering from Arizona State University. She holds a bachelor’s degree in physics and chemistry from California State University, San Marcos.

Gielstra is a biogeographer, course designer and faculty member in the College of General Studies Environmental Science program, with research interests in human and environmental connections, geography, and polar, mountain and riparian environments. Gielstra earned a doctorate in geography from Texas A&M University and holds a Master of Science in Environmental Studies from the Medical University of South Carolina and a Bachelor of Science in biology from Coastal Carolina University.

Oberding is a coastal ecologist, course designer and faculty member in the College of General Studies Environmental Science program. His research interests include hydrology, mariculture, coral, ecology and environmental remediation. He earned a doctorate in natural resource and environmental management from the University of Hawaii at Manoa and holds a Master of Science in mariculture from Texas A&M University Corpus Christi and a Bachelor of Science in biology from the University of New Mexico.

Cerveny is a Professor of Geography in the Department of Cultural Science, Philosophy, and Religious Studies at Mesa Community College in Arizona. Her research interests are in geomorphology, landscape evolution, Native American rock art conservation, and sustainable heritage management.

The full article is available here: https://doi.org/10.1080/19338341.2025.2592717

Reassessing the Role of Standardized Tests in University Admissions

 There is a long-running debate over using standardized test scores to inform college and graduate admissions decisions, with some arguing that test scores are an important signal of academic strength and others arguing that they are biased and exclusionary. 

This study revisits this issue by analyzing a novel dataset of more than 13,000 applications over roughly a decade to a large public policy master’s program in the United States. 

Consistent with past work, the authors find that GRE scores substantially improve predictions of first-year grades relative to predictions based on GPA alone. However, when these predictions are used to inform admissions decisions, they find that test scores only modestly improve the expected academic quality of admitted students. 

The gap shrinks further when they augment the test-aware and test-blind predictive models with more fine-grained information available in student transcripts and other application materials. Specifically, they estimate that incorporating standardized test scores in our setting would result in admitting students who perform, on average, only 0.03 grade points better. 

They show—both empirically and theoretically—that this pattern stems from a subtle distinction between predictions and decisions. Even with improved predictions, the downstream admissions decisions are often the same; and where there are differences, they often involve selecting between similarly qualified applicants. 

The results indicate that standardized test scores may be less important for university admissions than previously suggested.

The Labor Market Value of Community College Bachelor’s Degrees

 Community colleges are more financially, academically, and geographically accessible than four-year institutions. Yet despite most community college students intending to earn a bachelor’s degree, few successfully transfer and complete one. Community College Baccalaureate (CCB) programs have emerged as an alternative pathway, allowing community colleges to confer bachelor’s degrees directly. However, little is known about how employers value these credentials in the labor market. 

To address this question, the authors of this study conducted the first resume audit study of CCB degrees, submitting fictitious applications to real job vacancies while experimentally varying applicants’ educational credentials, degree-granting institutions, and demographic signals. 

In this pilot study, they focused on the early childhood education (ECE) labor market, a rapidly growing CCB field characterized by labor shortages and increasing educational requirements. They find that employers view CCB degrees similarly to both traditional bachelor’s and associate degrees, with statistically indistinguishable interview-request rates across degree types. 

A text analysis of employer callback messages reveals little evidence that employers communicate differently with CCB applicants, while a net-price simulation suggests that sticker-price comparisons substantially overstate the affordability advantage of CCB programs. 

Together, these findings provide new evidence on the labor market value and affordability of CCB degrees and inform an ongoing large-scale audit study across additional fields and labor markets.