Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Measuring how teachers' emotions can impact student learning
University of Delaware professor Leigh McLean has developed a new tool for measuring teachers’ emotional expressions and studying how these expressions affect their students’ attitudes toward learning. McLean uses this tool to gather new data showing emotional transmission between teachers and their students in fourth-grade classrooms. McLean and co-author Nathan Jones of Boston University share the results of their use of the tool in a new article in Contemporary Educational Psychology. They found that teachers displayed far more positive emotions than negative ones. But they also found that some teachers showed high levels of negative emotions. In these cases, teachers’ expressions of negative emotions were associated with reduced student enjoyment of learning and engagement. These findings add to a compelling body of research highlighting the importance of teachers’ and students’ emotional experiences within the context of teaching and learning. “Anyone who has been in a classroom knows that it is an inherently emotional environment, but we still don’t fully understand exactly how emotions, and especially the teachers’ emotions, work to either support or detract from students’ learning,” said McLean, who studies teachers’ emotions and well-being in the College of Education and Human Development’s School of Education (SOE) and Center Research in Education and Social Policy. “This new tool, and these findings, help us understand these processes more precisely and point to how we might provide emotion-centered classroom supports.” Measuring teacher and student emotions McLean and Jones collected survey data and video-recorded classroom observations from 65 fourth-grade teachers and 805 students in a Southwestern U.S. state. The surveys asked participants to report their emotions and emotion-related experiences — like feelings of enjoyment, worry or boredom — as well as their teaching and learning behaviors in mathematics and English language arts (ELA). Using the new observational tool they developed — the Teacher Affect Coding System — McLean and Jones also assessed teachers’ vocal tones, body posturing, body movements and facial expressions during classroom instruction and categorized outward displays of emotion as positive, negative or neutral. For example, higher-pitched or lilting vocal tones were categorized as positive, while noticeably harsh or sad vocal tones were categorized as negative. Overall, McLean and Jones found that teachers spent most of their instructional time displaying outward positive emotions. Interestingly though, they did not find any associations between these positive emotions and students’ content-related emotions or learning attitudes in ELA or math. “This lack of association might be because outward positivity is the relative ‘norm’ for elementary school teachers, and our data seem to support that,” McLean said. “That’s not to say that teachers’ positivity isn’t important, though. Decades of research has shown us that when teachers are warm, responsive and supportive, and when they foster positive relationships with their students, students do better in almost every way. It could be that positivity works best when done in tandem with other important teacher behaviors or routines, or it could be that it is more relevant for different student outcomes.” However, they did find that a small subset of teachers — about 10% — displayed notable amounts of negative emotions, with some showing negativity during as much as 80% of their instructional time. The students of these teachers reported reduced enjoyment and engagement in their ELA classes and reduced engagement in their math classes. “We think that these teachers are struggling with their real-time emotion regulation skills,” McLean said. “Any teacher, even a very positive one, will tell you that managing a classroom of students is challenging, and staying positive through the frustrating times takes a lot of emotional regulation. Emotion regulation is a particularly important skill for teachers because children inherently look to the social cues of adults in their immediate environment to gauge their level of safety and comfort. When a teacher is dysregulated, their students pick up on this in ways that can detract from learning.” Recommendations for supporting teacher well-being Given the findings of their study, McLean and Jones make several recommendations for teacher preparation and professional learning programs. As a first step, they recommend that teacher preparation and professional learning programs share information about how negative emotions and experiences are a normal part of the teaching experience. As McLean said, “It’s okay to be frustrated!” However, it is also important to be aware that repeated outward displays of negative emotion can impact students. McLean and Jones also suggest that these programs provide specific training to teachers on skills such as mindfulness and emotion regulation to help teachers manage negative emotions while they’re teaching. “Logically, these findings and recommendations make complete sense,” said Steve Amendum, professor and director of CEHD’s SOE, which offers a K-8 teacher education program. “After working with many, many teachers, I often see teachers' enthusiasm or dislike for a particular activity or content area transfer to their students.” McLean and Jones, however, emphasize that supporting teacher well-being can’t just be up to the teachers. Assistant principals, principals and other educational leaders should prioritize teacher wellness across the school and district. If teachers’ negative emotions in the classroom result in part from challenging working conditions or insufficient resources, educational leaders and policymakers should consider system-wide changes and supports to foster teacher well-being. To learn more about CEHD research in social and emotional development, visit its research page. To arrange an interview with McLean, connect with her directly by clicking on the contact button found on her ExpertFile profile page.
Myanmar’s earthquake crisis demands international humanitarian intervention - before it’s too late
We are at a crossroads. Will the international community intervene in Myanmar to save lives, or will it once again retreat into silence until it is too late? In the shadow of disaster, silence is complicity. The devastating earthquake that recently struck Myanmar, registering a magnitude of 7.7 and claiming over a thousand lives with the potential for fatalities to rise into the tens of thousands, is far more than a natural calamity - it is a preventable humanitarian catastrophe. The international community must confront a difficult question: How many more lives must be lost before the world steps in? As someone who has studied disaster governance for over two decades, I can say with a heavy heart that what we are witnessing in Myanmar is a textbook case of systemic failure - of national crisis management, of international humanitarian coordination and, most disturbingly, of disaster diplomacy. A Crisis Exacerbated by Inaction The situation on the ground is dire. Entire villages lie in ruins across Shan State and Mandalay. Liquefaction, caused by the shifting of tectonic plates, has turned many areas into unstable wetlands, with water seeping through the ground continuously. With countless bodies left unrecovered and proper sanitation systems overwhelmed, the risk of cholera and other waterborne diseases looms large. In past disasters - be it Haiti in 2010, Nepal in 2015 or the Turkey-Syria earthquake of 2023 - we saw the tragic consequences of slow and politicised humanitarian responses. But Myanmar’s case is uniquely perilous. The country is not only facing a natural disaster but also the aftermath of years of civil conflict, military rule and geopolitical paralysis. The ruling junta’s statements and figures are unreliable at best and disinformation is hampering coordinated international support. When Aid Needs Armour The reality is that humanitarian intervention in Myanmar now requires more than blankets and bottled water - it needs boots on the ground. Given the multiplicity of armed rebel groups and the entrenched conflict dynamics, any aid convoy risks becoming a pawn in a larger power struggle. We need an international peacekeeping force, mandated strictly for humanitarian purposes, to ensure safe and unfettered access to affected populations. This must be a neutral, apolitical force, equipped to operate in a complex, high-risk environment - not to take sides, but to protect lives. Without such security guarantees, humanitarian agencies cannot function, and the crisis will evolve into famine, mass migration, and possibly regional instability across Southeast Asia. A Crisis of Leadership The United Nations, ASEAN, WHO and other key global institutions have yet again fallen short of timely action. The ineffectiveness of their response should prompt a critical reevaluation of their governance structures and crisis leadership models. The deeper issue is not just logistical - it’s moral. In the absence of strong, scientifically-informed and transparent leadership, international aid becomes another layer of dysfunction. We need a new generation of disaster governance professionals - leaders trained not only in logistics and law, but in negotiation, ethics and diplomacy. The Cost of Indifference Myanmar’s crisis will not remain confined within its borders. Already, we are seeing early signs of mass displacement towards India, Thailand and Bangladesh. If left unchecked, these flows will eventually extend to Europe, the UK and beyond, burdening an already overstretched global refugee system. The longer we delay, the greater the consequences - not just for Myanmar, but for the world. A Call for Science, Transparency and Regional Solidarity As academics and practitioners in the field of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), we must hold ourselves to the highest standard of integrity. DRR in regions like South and Southeast Asia must be built on inclusive science, open data, regional collaboration and local knowledge. Taiwan and Singapore offer examples of how early warning systems and data transparency can save lives - why aren't we replicating these models more widely? If this disaster teaches us anything, it is that sovereignty cannot be used as a shield for inaction. A disaster of this magnitude transcends politics. It is a test of our global conscience.
Life Beyond Earth? Florida Tech's Expert's are Hoping SPHEREx Will Have The Answer
In March, NASA's SPHEREx — short for Spectro-Photometer for the History of the Universe, Epoch of Reionization and Ices Explorer — was launched to the skies and far into space. Its mission has received plentiful media coverage but demands the expert analysis of scholars like astrobiologist Manasvi Lingam, an assistant professor of aerospace, physics and space sciences at the Florida Institute of Technology. The space telescope is designed to [operate] with unmatched clarity, gathering a big-picture view that will help scientists tackle questions about the origin of the universe itself, the galaxies within and life's essential ingredients wafting in our home galaxy, the Milky Way. While scientists have previously detected lots of complex organic molecules in the interstellar medium and protoplanetary disks, "we still do not know a lot about the actual abundances of useful building blocks," astrobiologist Manasvi Lingam of the Florida Institute of Technology told Space.com. That means scientists don't have strong constraints about how efficiently frozen water molecules are transferred from interstellar clouds to protoplanetary disks, where they would eventually be incorporated into newborn planets, he said. "This mission can improve the data, and help make better forecasts about the probability of the origin of life on those worlds." Looking to know more about Astrobiology and the work Manasvi Lingam is doing at Florida Tech? March 01 - Space.com Looking to know more about this latest NASA mission? Let us help. Astrobiologist Manasvi Lingam, author and assistant professor of aerospace, physics and space sciences at Florida Tech, is available to speak with media regarding this and related topics. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview.
NASA Grant Funds Research Exploring Methods of Training Vision-Based Autonomous Systems
Conducting research at 5:30 a.m. may not be everybody’s first choice. But for Siddhartha Bhattacharyya and Ph.D. students Mohammed Abdul, Hafeez Khan and Parth Ganeriwala, it’s an essential part of the process for their latest endeavor. Bhattacharyya and his students are developing a more efficient framework for creating and evaluating image-based machine learning classification models for autonomous systems, such as those guiding cars and aircraft. That process involves creating new datasets with taxiway and runway images for vision-based autonomous aircraft. Just as humans need textbooks to fuel their learning, some machines are taught using thousands of photographs and images of the environment where their autonomous pupil will eventually operate. To help ensure their trained models can identify the correct course to take in a hyper-specific environment – with indicators such as centerline markings and side stripes on a runway at dawn – Bhattacharyya and his Ph.D. students chose a December morning to rise with the sun, board one of Florida Tech’s Piper Archer aircraft and photograph the views from above. Bhattacharyya, an associate professor of computer science and software engineering, is exploring the boundaries of operation of efficient and effective machine-learning approaches for vision-based classification in autonomous systems. In this case, these machine learning systems are trained on video or image data collected from environments including runways, taxiways or roadways. With this kind of model, it can take more than 100,000 images to help the algorithm learn and adapt to an environment. Today’s technology demands a pronounced human effort to manually label and classify each image. This can be an overwhelming process. To combat that, Bhattacharyya was awarded funding from NASA Langley Research Center to advance existing machine learning/computer vision-based systems, such as his lab’s “Advanced Line Identification and Notation Algorithm” (ALINA), by exploring automated labeling that would enable the model to learn and classify data itself – with humans intervening only as necessary. This measure would ease the overwhelming human demand, he said. ALINA is an annotation framework that Hafeez and Parth developed under Bhattacharyya’s guidance to detect and label data for algorithms, such as taxiway line markings for autonomous aircraft. Bhattacharyya will use NASA’s funding to explore transfer learning-based approaches, led by Parth, and few-shot learning (FSL) approaches, led by Hafeez. The researchers are collecting images via GoPro of runways and taxiways at airports in Melbourne and Grant-Valkaria with help from Florida Tech’s College of Aeronautics. Bhattacharyya’s students will take the data they collect from the airports and train their models to, in theory, drive an aircraft autonomously. They are working to collect diverse images of the runways – those of different angles and weather and lighting conditions – so that the model learns to identify patterns that determine the most accurate course regardless of environment or conditions. That includes the daybreak images captured on that December flight. “We went at sunrise, where there is glare on the camera. Now we need to see if it’s able to identify the lines at night because that’s when there are lights embedded on the taxiways,” Bhattacharyya said. “We want to collect diverse datasets and see what methods work, what methods fail and what else do we need to do to build that reliable software.” Transfer learning is a machine learning technique in which a model trained to do one task can generalize information and reuse it to complete another task. For example, a model trained to drive autonomous cars could transfer its intelligence to drive autonomous aircraft. This transfer helps explore generalization of knowledge. It also improves efficiency by eliminating the need for new models that complete different but related tasks. For example, a car trained to operate autonomously in California could retain generalized knowledge when learning how to drive in Florida, despite different landscapes. “This model already knows lines and lanes, and we are going to train it on certain other types of lines hoping it generalizes and keeps the previous knowledge,” Bhattacharyya explained. “That model could do both tasks, as humans do.” FSL is a technique that teaches a model to generalize information with just a few data samples instead of the massive datasets used in transfer learning. With this type of training, a model should be able to identify an environment based on just four or five images. “That would help us reduce the time and cost of data collection as well as time spent labeling the data that we typically go through for several thousands of datasets,” Bhattacharyya said. Learning when results may or may not be reliable is a key part of this research. Bhattacharyya said identifying degradation in the autonomous system’s performance will help guide the development of online monitors that can catch errors and alert human operators to take corrective action. Ultimately, he hopes that this research can help create a future where we utilize the benefits of machine learning without fear of it failing before notifying the operator, driver or user. “That’s the end goal,” Bhattacharyya said. “It motivates me to learn how the context relates to assumptions associated with these images, that helps in understanding when the autonomous system is not confident in its decision, thus sending an alert to the user. This could apply to a future generation of autonomous systems where we don’t need to fear the unknown – when the system could fail.” Siddhartha (Sid) Bhattacharyya’s primary area of research expertise/interest is in model based engineering, formal methods, machine learning engineering, and explainable AI applied to intelligent autonomous systems, cyber security, human factors, healthcare, explainable AI, and avionics. His research lab ASSIST (Assured Safety, Security, and Intent with Systematic Tactics) focuses on the research in the design of innovative formal methods to assure performance of intelligent systems, machine learning engineering to characterize intelligent systems for safety and model based engineering to analyze system behavior. Siddhartha Bhattacharyya is available to speak with media. Contact Adam Lowenstein, Director of Media Communications at Florida Institute of Technology at adam@fit.edu to arrange an interview today.
Protect yourself: Scammed by a QR Code? It didn’t have to happen
QR codes are used everywhere nowadays – to pay for metered parking, to read menus at restaurants, to win a free cup of coffee. Cybercriminals are using them, too – redirecting users to harmful websites that harvest their data. The practice is known as “quishing,” derived from QR code phishing, and it is a fast-growing cybercrime. But it doesn’t have to be. University of Rochester engineers Gaurav Sharma and Irving Barron have devised a new form of QR code – called a self-authenticating dual-modulated QR (SDMQR) – that protects smartphone users from quishing attacks by signaling when users are being directed to a safe link or a potential scam. Gaurav is a professor of electrical and computer engineering, computer science, and biostatistics and computational biology. Barron is an assistant professor of instruction in electrical computer engineering. Their creation involves allowing companies to register their websites and embed a cryptographic signature in a QR code. When the code is scanned, the user is notified that the code is from an official source and safe. Gaurav and Barron recently wrote about their technology in the journal IEEE Security and Privacy, and spoke about their work on the National Science Foundation's Discovery Files podcast. They can be reached by email at gaurav.sharma@rochester.edu and ibarron@ur.rochester.edu.
For autonomous machines to flourish, scalability is everything
The past decade has seen remarkable advancements in robotics and AI technologies, ushering in the era of autonomous machines. While the rise of these machines promises to revolutionize our economy, the reality has fallen short of expectations. That’s not for a lack of intensive investments in research in development, says Yuhao Zhu, an associate professor of computer science at the University of Rochester. The reason we’re not seeing more service robots, autonomous drones, and self-driving vehicles, Zhu says, is that autonomation development is currently scaling with the size of engineering teams rather than the amount of relevant data and computational resources. This limitation prevents the autonomy industry from fully leveraging economies of scale, Zhu says, particularly the exponentially decreasing cost of computing power and the explosion of available data. Zhu recently co-authored a report on the quest for economies of scale in autonomation in Communications of the ACM and is part of an international team of computer scientists focused on making autonomous machines more reliable and less costly. He can be reached by email at yzhu@rochester.edu.
Off-channel communications (OCC) occur when employees use unapproved and inadequately protected devices – such as personal cellphones – or applications to communicate with co-workers, counterparties and / or clients. Many financial services firms are required to maintain copies of all communications regarding their business, supervise the same, and produce them in response to regulatory requests. Firms cannot meet those compliance obligations when employees resort to unauthorized OCC for business-related matters. In charging 15 broker-dealers and one affiliated investment advisor in September 2022 with record-keeping violations, the SEC noted that its investigation uncovered employees at all levels of these firms who routinely used text messaging apps on their personal devices to discuss business matters between January 2018 and September 2021 [1]. The firms settled the charges and agreed to pay penalties totaling more than $1.1 billion. Just as important, the firms also agreed to engage independent compliance consultants to ensure the use of OCC meets regulatory standards as part of the settlements. In a related move [2], the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) ordered 11 financial institutions to pay more than $710 million for recordkeeping and supervision failures for widespread use of unapproved communication methods such as personal texts, WhatsApp, and Signal. Additionally, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has also taken action when it comes to OCC. Antonio Rega, digital forensics, data governance, privacy, security, emerging technology, and discovery expert with J.S. Held, observes, “While the current administration has loosened certain regulatory enforcement near-term, we continue to observe requests from clients in supporting management of “off-channel” communications, with a particular focus on 3rd party chat messaging platforms on mobile devices, such as Whatsapp. These inquiries include supporting corporate stakeholders with internal auditing of their organizational platforms, policies and procedures.” By implementing effective processes and utilizing software and outside experts to monitor and detect OCC, broker-dealers, investment advisers, and other financial institutions can reduce the risk of regulatory enforcement and penalties and ensure that they remain in compliance with regulations. Steve Strombelline, regulatory and enterprise risk management expert with J.S. Held adds, “Although concerns typically impact broker-dealers, firms outside of financial sectors are looking closely at their messaging processes as well, which is advisable." In addition to guaranteeing that these communications are properly documented and retained, the regulations are set up to prevent the use of OCC to manipulate securities transactions or commit fraud and to ensure that it is not used to violate any other securities laws. Firms’ supervisory procedures must be reasonably designed to detect for OCC when they monitor for such activity. The following article discusses the risks that OCC pose for financial services firms, especially as the SEC, FINRA, and the CFTC have made it clear that they are now targeting firms throughout the industry about their OCC to see if they are recording and preserving business information according to regulations. The piece also explains how firms, including broker-dealers of all sizes, should manage their OCC to ensure that they and their employees comply with federal securities laws and regulations. Finally, the authors address the complexity related to the collection of OCC in response to regulatory enforcement investigative requests. As the fines and settlements between those firms and the SEC exemplify, financial services firms of all sizes need to take this regulatory focus seriously and take the proactive step of engaging an independent third-party with expertise and experience in both digital forensics and compliance issues. To read the full article and learn more about the risk of off-channel communications and how companies should manage their OCC to remain compliant, click on the button below: To connect with Antonio Rega simply click on his icon now. To arrange a conversation with Steve Strombelline or any other media inquiries - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com References [1] https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-174 [2] https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8599-22
A Bumpy Ride Ahead for HigherEd
A confluence of political, economic, and social challenges is threatening the very fabric of US universities. In both red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds facing institutions are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. Universities find themselves squeezed by funding cuts, scrutinized by lawmakers, and caught in cultural crossfire. This presents a unique challenge for communications professionals. In this era of declining trust and “alternative facts,” they need to be hyper-informed, adapt quickly, and boldly emphasize the critical value institutions have in society. Communications should function as a vital link, bridging this growing divide between town and gown. In red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds hitting higher education are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. It's important to note that throughout history, universities often emerge stronger and more deeply connected to the public during times of turbulence. Universities played a key role in partnering with the government to implement Roosevelt's New Deal, helping with emergency relief and agricultural programs. They helped democratize education with the GI Bill after World War II. They responded to societal demands during the civil rights era. Most recently, they played a key role in public health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Campus communicators have a unique set of skills and a vital responsibility to steer their institutions through these tough times. But the road ahead will be hard. The New Reality for Campus Communicators Cuts to Research Funding The lifeblood of academic innovation—research dollars—is under threat. The new political regime in Washington is looking to cut billions in federal research funding. A sudden cap on NIH indirect costs (slashed to 15% from an average of 28%) will have a profound impact on programs. Many researchers report that major grants are frozen or are expected to shrink. This “budget axe” isn’t theoretical for research universities—it’s biting right now. Communicators must convey what’s at stake: essential contributions such as groundbreaking science, community health programs, and innovation pipelines that fuel the economy hang in the balance as money gets tighter. Increasing State Oversight & Regulation In state capitals, politicians are muscling into campus affairs like never before. Republican-controlled statehouses are overhauling higher education governance, introducing over 150 bills in 35 states aimed at tightening control over public institutions. Even tenure is threatened. In the past year, lawmakers in seven states moved to eliminate or curb tenure and impose stricter post-tenure reviews – an unprecedented encroachment on academic freedom. New laws and proposals are creating oversight committees, mandating changes to the curriculum, and even threatening funding for programs out of political favor. The message from some state capitols is clear: “We’re watching you.” This surge in oversight and regulatory meddling means university communicators must navigate an increasingly fine line, demonstrating transparency and accountability at every turn to appease regulators while fiercely defending their institution’s academic autonomy. Political Pressure and DEI Backlash Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are under open attack. What began as partisan rhetoric has evolved into concrete threats – and actions – against campus diversity efforts. Dozens of states have passed or proposed laws to defund DEI offices, ban diversity training, or restrict teaching about race and gender. The result? An “inconsistent and confusing landscape” for colleges as they respond to swelling political pressure. The campaign against campus DEI has dramatically accelerated in 2025, turbocharged by signals from the Trump administration pushing to eliminate DEI efforts across government and higher ed. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education 270 campuses in 38 states have already scaled back or dismantled some DEI programs under this pressure. For communications teams, the DEI backlash creates a messaging minefield. They must affirm institutional values of inclusion and support for marginalized groups, even as those very programs face hostile scrutiny from powerful critics. Threats to the Federal Department of Education In Washington, the unthinkable is suddenly on the table: the U.S. Department of Education itself is in the crosshairs. President Trump has made good on campaign promises by signing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. While outright abolition requires Congress, the administration has already laid off nearly half of the department’s staff and moved to strip the agency to its bare bones. “We’re going to shut it down… it’s doing us no good,” Trump declared. This unprecedented move could upend federal support and guidelines for universities – from financial aid administration to civil rights enforcement – leaving states to fill the void. Communications professionals must reassure students, faculty, and the public that education won’t grind to a halt if federal oversight wanes. It’s a communications tightrope: acknowledging the potential for massive change while conveying stability in the university’s core mission. After all, even if Washington pulls back, universities still answer to accreditation bodies and the public trust. The Misinformation Deluge on Social Media The information ecosystem has never been more chaotic – or more dangerous. Universities are grappling with viral misinformation and disinformation that can ignite campus controversies overnight. In the age of TikTok rumors and politicized Twitter (or “X”) feeds, false narratives spread like wildfire before facts can catch up. Recent campus incidents have shown how quickly truth gets muddled: one university saw fake reports about a protest spread widely. At the same time, another dealt with a gross misinterpretation of a student gathering that went viral. Photos and videos are routinely ripped out of context or deliberately edited with misleading labels. The public, meanwhile, is “bombarded with misinformation” online and growing distrustful of experts. For higher ed communicators, countering misinformation means fighting a two-front war: rapidly correcting falsehoods about their institution and proactively pushing out accurate, compelling content to capture attention before the rumors do. Economic Uncertainty and Budget Turbulence. Even aside from targeted funding cuts, universities are feeling economic whiplash. Inflation, endowment fluctuations, and post-pandemic enrolment dips have collided to squeeze campus finances. Many institutions face structural deficits and tough choices about programs and staffing. In fact, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, two-thirds of colleges now show at least one sign of financial stress – a startling statistic that underscores how widespread the budget crunch has become. From flagship public universities to small private colleges, hiring freezes and spending cuts are the order of the day. Every dollar is scrutinized by trustees and legislators alike. Communications pros must now operate in a climate of fiscal anxiety, where messages about any new initiative or expense can trigger questions about priorities. The task at hand is to highlight the university’s economic stewardship and continued value to students and the community, even as belts tighten. It’s critical to communicate that the institution is navigating the storm responsibly—protecting its academic core and maximizing the impact of every precious dollar. Demands to Prove Real-world Impact “What is higher ed really doing for society?” In 2025, that question echoes from state capitols, donors’ boards, and kitchen tables across America. Universities are under intense pressure to demonstrate the real-world value of their research and teaching like never before. Lawmakers openly discuss ROI (return on investment) for degrees and research grants, seeking data on graduates’ earnings and innovations spawned per taxpayer dollar. Public confidence in higher education has been shaken – a recent Gallup survey found Americans’ confidence in colleges has plummeted to 36%, down from 57% in 2015. Many believe in personal value (a college degree for better jobs) but doubt that higher education delivers for the greater good. In short, the public is skeptical whether campus research and scholarship are worth the cost. University communicators must do more than publicize exciting discoveries – they must connect the dots for people. Every media release, story, or tweet should answer: Here’s how this university’s work benefits you, your community, and the world. Whether it’s a medical breakthrough, a tech startup from the lab, or a student project solving a local problem, the mandate is clear: show impact or risk losing support. In my next post, I'll provide a detailed blueprint to help communications professionals proactively plan and organize their teams for the road ahead. This actionable framework will help you better identify where you can add value for your institution where it needs it the most and confirm your critical role as a trusted resource. To your success! Upcoming Speaking Events April 23 PRSA Virtual Workshop "Cutting Through the Noise: What Thought Leadership Strategies are Working in Today’s Environment” Register Here June 8 IABC World Conference, Vancouver “The Thought Leadership Blueprint: Why & How to Build a High-Impact Program” Register Here Sept. 12-13 PRSA East Central Conference, Cleveland “The New Comms Leadership Skillset” Register Here About ExpertFile ExpertFile is revolutionizing how organizations connect their experts to journalists, podcasters, and conference organizers who need to find credible experts on tight deadlines…fast. Featuring experts on over 50,000 topics, our free Apple and Android mobile app is the go-to resource for journalists at media outlets such as the New York Times, CNN, NPR Radio, Fox News, BBC, The Guardian, ABC News, CBC, AXIOS and Time Magazine. For over a decade, our award-winning software platform has been helping marketing departments better manage and promote their online thought leadership to reach a wider audience. Clients include Carnegie Mellon University, ChristianaCare Health, Villanova University, Aston University and Emory University. Learn more at: expertfile.com/getstarted
New survey shows lack of public trust in Musk, DOGE
New data from the Center for Political Communication (CPC) at the University of Delaware shows many Americans have little trust in either Elon Musk or the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a nationally-representative sample of 1,600 adult Americans surveyed by YouGov between February 27 and March 5, 2025, CPC researchers asked how much trust respondents had in various people and institutions, including Elon Musk, the Department of Government Efficiency, and President Trump. Among the key findings: • 25% of Americans report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Elon Musk 26% report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). • 33% report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in President Donald Trump. • About half of Republicans report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in either (compared to 70% of Republicans who report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in President Trump). • Among independent voters, only 11% report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Musk and 13% in DOGE. “As constituents in Republican districts learn about and voice concerns about DOGE’s cuts to Veteran’s Affairs, The National Institutes of Health, National Parks, and the Federal Aviation Administration, it will be interesting to see how public trust in Musk and DOGE may be affected,” said Dr. Dannagal Young, Director of the Center for Political Communication and one of the authors of the survey. “Understanding public sentiment about these unique government entities is essential to help ensure that elected officials are responsive to voter concerns." Visit the CPC's website for full results of the survey. To connect with Young for an interview, visit her profile and click the contact button.
Aston University study reveals the illusion of ‘dazzle’ paint on World War I battleships
The Zealandia in wartime dazzle paint. Image: Australian National Maritime Museum on The Commons Geometric ‘dazzle’ camouflage was used on ships in WWI to confuse enemy onlookers as to the direction and speed of the ship Timothy Meese and Samantha Strong reanalysed historic data from 1919 and found that the ‘horizon effect’ is more effective for confusion When viewing a ship at distance, it often appears to be travelling along the horizon, regardless of its actual direction of travel – this is the ‘horizon effect’. A new analysis of 105-year-old data on the effectiveness of ‘dazzle’ camouflage on battleships in World War I by Aston University researchers Professor Tim Meese and Dr Samantha Strong has found that while dazzle had some effect, the ‘horizon effect’ had far more influence when it came to confusing the enemy. During World War I, navies experimented with painting ships with ‘dazzle’ camouflage – geometric shapes and stripes – in an attempt to confuse U-boat captains as to the speed and direction of travel of the ships and make them harder to attack. The separate ‘horizon effect’ is when a person looks at a ship in the distance, and it appears to be travelling along the horizon, regardless of its actual direction of travel. Ships travelling at an angle of up to 25° relative to the horizon appear to be travelling directly along it. Even with those at a greater angle to the horizon, onlookers significantly underestimate the angle. Despite widespread use of dazzle camouflage, it was not until 1919 that a proper, quantitative study was carried out, by MIT naval architecture and marine engineering student Leo Blodgett for his degree thesis. He painted model ships in dazzle patterns and placed them in a mechanical test theatre with a periscope, like those used by U-boat captains, to measure how much onlookers’ estimations of the ships’ direction of travel deviated from their actual direction of travel. Professor Meese and Dr Strong realised that while the data collected by Blodgett was useful, his methods of experimental design fell short of modern standards. He’d found that dazzle camouflage worked, but the Aston University team suspected that dazzle alone was not responsible for the results seen, cleaned the data and designed new analysis to better understand what it really shows. Dr Strong, a senior lecturer at Aston University’s School of Optometry, said: “It's necessary to have a control condition to draw firm conclusions, and Blodgett's report of his own control was too vague to be useful. We ran our own version of the experiment using photographs from his thesis and compared the results across the original dazzle camouflage versions and versions with the camouflage edited out. Our experiment worked well. Both types of ships produced the horizon effect, but the dazzle imposed an additional twist.” If the errors made by the onlookers in the perceived direction of travel of the ship were entirely due to the ‘twist’ on perspective caused by dazzle paintwork, the bow, or front, of the ship, would always be seen to twist away from its true direction. However, Professor Meese and Dr Strong instead showed that when the true direction was pointing away from the observer, the bow was often perceived to twist towards the observer instead. Their detailed analysis showed a small effect of twist from the dazzle camouflage but a much larger one from the horizon effect. Sometimes these effects were in competition, sometimes in harmony. Professor Meese, a professor of vision science at the School of Optometry, said: “We knew already about the twist and horizon effects from contemporary computer-based work with colleagues at Abertay University. The remarkable finding here is that these same two effects, in similar proportions, are clearly evident in participants familiar with the art of camouflage deception, including a lieutenant in a European navy. This adds considerable credibility to our earlier conclusions by showing that the horizon effect – which has nothing to do with dazzle – was not overcome by those best placed to know better. “This is a clear case where visual perception is more powerful than knowledge. In fact, back in the dazzle days, the horizon effect was not identified at all, and Blodgett's measurements of perceptual bias were attributed entirely to the camouflage, deceiving the deceivers.” Professor Meese and Dr Strong say that more work is required to fully understand how dazzle might have increased perceptual uncertainty of direction and speed but also the geometry behind torpedo-aiming tactics that might have supported some countermeasures. Visit https://doi.org/10.1177/20416695241312316 to read the full paper in i-Perception.
