Trust in America's elite universities has declined sharply over the past decade [non-paywalled source]. A Manhattan Institute survey conducted in June 2025 found that only 42% of Americans have significant trust in higher education, down 15 percentage points from a decade earlier. Trust in Ivy League institutions stands at just 15%.

Harvard is considering building trade schools as part of a settlement with the Trump administration. The proposal comes as elite universities face criticism for shifting focus from academic excellence to shaping students' political and moral values. Princeton changed its informal motto in 2016 to "In the Nation's Service and the Service of Humanity." Grade inflation has become prevalent at elite schools. A Bloomberg column argues universities should adopt more objective admissions criteria, reduce grade inflation, and make education their primary mission again rather than attempting to fix societal problems.

"Computer science went from a future-proof career to an industry in upheaval in a shockingly small amount of time," writes Business Insider, citing remarks from UC Berkeley professor Hany Farid said during a recent episode of Nova's "Particles of Thought" podcast.

"Our students typically had five internship offers throughout their first four years of college," Farid said. "They would graduate with exceedingly high salaries, multiple offers. They had the run of the place. That is not happening today. They're happy to get one job offer...." It's too easy to just blame AI, though, Farid said. "Something is happening in the industry," he said. "I think it's a confluence of many things. I think AI is part of it. I think there's a thinning of the ranks that's happening, that's part of it, but something is brewing..."

Farid, one of the world's experts on deepfake videos, said he is often asked for advice. He said what he tells students has changed... "Now, I think I'm telling people to be good at a lot of different things because we don't know what the future holds."

Like many in the AI space, Farid said that those who use breakthrough technologies will outlast those who don't. "I don't think AI is going to put lawyers out of business, but I think lawyers who use AI will put those who don't use AI out of business," he said. "And I think you can say that about every profession."

The editors of the culture magazine n + 1 decry the "well-funded upheaval" caused by a large and powerful coalition of pro-AI forces. ("According to the logic of market share as social transformation, if you move fast and break enough things, nothing can contain you...")

"An extraordinary amount of money is spent by the AI industry to ensure that acquiescence is the only plausible response. But marketing is not destiny." The AI bubble — and it is a bubble, as even OpenAI overlord Sam Altman has admitted — will burst. The technology's dizzying pace of improvement, already slowing with the release of GPT-5, will stall... [P]rofessional readers and writers: We retain some power over the terms and norms of our own intellectual life. We ought to stop acting like impotence in some realms means impotence everywhere. Major terrains remain AI-proofable. For publishers, editors, critics, professors, teachers, anyone with any say over what people read, the first step will be to develop an ear. Learn to tell — to read closely enough to tell — the work of people from the work of bots...

Whatever nuance is needed for its interception, resisting AI's further creep into intellectual labor will also require blunt-force militancy. The steps are simple. Don't publish AI bullshit. Don't even publish mealymouthed essays about the temptation to produce AI bullshit. Resist the call to establish worthless partnerships like the Washington Post's Ember, an "AI writing coach" designed to churn out Bezos-friendly op-eds. Instead, do what better magazines, newspapers, and journals have managed for centuries. Promote and produce original work of value, work that's cliché-resistant and unreplicable, work that tries — as Thomas Pynchon wrote in an oracular 1984 essay titled "Is It OK to Be a Luddite?" — "through literary means which are nocturnal and deal in disguise, to deny the machine...."

Punishing already overdisciplined and oversurveilled students for their AI use will help no one, but it's a long way from accepting that reality to Ohio State's new plan to mandate something called "AI fluency" for all graduates by 2029 (including workshops sponsored, naturally, by Google). Pedagogically, alternatives to acquiescence remain available. Some are old, like blue-book exams, in-class writing, or one-on-one tutoring. Some are new, like developing curricula to teach the limits and flaws of generative AI while nurturing human intelligence...

Our final defenses are more diffuse, working at a level of norms and attitudes. Stigmatization is a powerful force, and disgust and shame are among our greatest tools. Put plainly, you should feel bad for using AI. (The broad embrace of the term slop is a heartening sign of a nascent constituency for machine denial.) These systems haven't worked well for very long, and consensus about their use remains far from settled. That's why so much writing about AI writing sounds the way it does — nervous, uneven, ambivalent about the new regime's utility — and it means there's still time to disenchant AI, provincialize it, make it uncompelling and uncool...

As we train our sights on what we oppose, let's recall the costs of surrender. When we use generative AI, we consent to the appropriation of our intellectual property by data scrapers. We stuff the pockets of oligarchs with even more money. We abet the acceleration of a social media gyre that everyone admits is making life worse. We accept the further degradation of an already degraded educational system. We agree that we would rather deplete our natural resources than make our own art or think our own thoughts... A literature which is made by machines, which are owned by corporations, which are run by sociopaths, can only be a "stereotype" — a simplification, a facsimile, an insult, a fake — of real literature. It should be smashed, and can.
The 3,800-word article also argues that "perhaps AI's ascent in knowledge-industry workplaces will give rise to new demands and new reasons to organize..."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: When the COVID-19 pandemic forced kids to stay home, educators flocked to VMware, and thousands of school districts adopted virtualization. The technology became a solution for distance learning during the pandemic and after, when events such as bad weather and illness can prevent children from physically attending school. However, the VMware being sold to K-12 schools today differs from the VMware that existed before and during the pandemic. Now a Broadcom business, the platform features higher prices and a business strategy that favors big spenders. This has created unique problems for educational IT departments juggling restrictive budgets and multiple technology vendors with children's needs.

Ars Technica recently spoke with an IT director at a public school district in Indiana. The director requested anonymity for themself and the district out of concern about potential blowback. The director confirmed that the district has five schools and about 3,000 students. The district started using VMware's vSAN, a software-defined storage offering, and the vSphere virtualization platform in 2019. The Indiana school system bought the VMware offerings through a package that combined them with VxRail, which is hyperconverged infrastructure (HCI) hardware that Dell jointly engineered with VMware.

However, like many of VMware customers, the Indiana school district was priced out of VMware after Broadcom's acquisition of the company. The IT director said the district received a quote that was "three to six" times higher than expected. This came as the school district is looking to manage changes in education-related taxes and funding over the next few years. As a result, the district's migration from VMware is taking IT resources from other projects, including ones aimed at improving curriculum. For instance, the Indiana district has been trying to bolster its technology curriculum, the IT director said. One way is through a summer employment program for upperclassmen that teaches how to use real-world IT products, like VMware and Cisco Meraki technologies. The district previously relied on VMware-based virtual machines (VMs) for creating "very easily and accessible" test environments for these students. But the school is no longer able to provide that opportunity, creating a learning "barrier," as the IT director put it. The IT director told Ars that dealing with a migration could be "catastrophic in that that's too much work for one person," adding: "It could be a chokehold, essentially, to where they're going to be basically forced into switching platforms -- maybe before they were anticipating -- or paying exorbitant prices that have skyrocketed for absolutely no reason. Nothing on the software side has changed. It's the same software. There's no features being added. Nobody's benefiting from the higher prices on the education side."

Abstract of a paper on pre-print server Arxiv: Elites disproportionately influence policymaking, yet little is known about their fairness and efficiency preferences -- key determinants of support for redistributive policies. We investigate these preferences in an incentivized lab experiment with a group of future elites -- Ivy League MBA students. We find that MBA students implement substantially more unequal earnings distributions than the average American, regardless of whether inequality stems from luck or merit. Their redistributive choices are also highly responsive to efficiency costs, with an effect that is an order of magnitude larger than that found in representative U.S. samples. Analyzing fairness ideals, we find that MBA students are less likely to be strict meritocrats than the broader population. These findings provide novel insights into how elites' redistributive preferences may shape high levels of inequality in the U.S.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Battered by funding cuts, bombarded by the White House and braced for demographic changes set to send enrollment into a nosedive, America's colleges and universities have spent this year in flux. But one of higher education's rituals resurfaced again on Tuesday, when U.S. News & World Report published the college rankings that many administrators obsessively track and routinely malign. And, at least in the judgment of U.S. News, all of the headline-making upheaval has so far led to ... well, a lot of stability.

Princeton University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University retained the top three spots in the publisher's rankings of national universities. Stanford University kept its place at No. 4, though Yale University also joined it there. Williams College remained U.S. News's pick for the best national liberal arts college, just as Spelman College was again the top-ranked historically Black institution. In one notable change, the University of California, Berkeley, was deemed the country's top public university. But it simply switched places with its counterpart in Los Angeles.

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: Over at the Communications of the ACM, Bard College CS Prof Valerie Barr explains why she's Feeling Cranky About AI and CS Education. Having seen CS education go through a number of we-have-to-teach-this moments over the decades — introductory programming languages, the Web, Data Science, etc. — Barr turns her attention to the next hand-wringing "what will we do" CS education moment with AI.

"We're jumping through hoops without stopping first to question the run-away train," Barr writes...

Barr calls for stepping back from "the industry assertion that the ship has sailed, every student needs to use AI early and often, and there is no future application that isn't going to use AI in some way" and instead thoughtfully "articulate what sort of future problem solvers and software developers we want to graduate from our programs, and determine ways in which the incorporation of AI can help us get there."
From the article: In much discussion about CS education:

a.) There's little interest in interrogating the downsides of generative AI, such as the environmental impact, the data theft impact, the treatment and exploitation of data workers.

b.) There's little interest in considering the extent to which, by incorporating generative AI into our teaching, we end up supporting a handful of companies that are burning billions in a vain attempt to each achieve performance that is a scintilla better than everyone else's.

c.) There's little interest in thinking about what's going to happen when the LLM companies decide that they have plateaued, that there's no more money to burn/spend, and a bunch of them fold—but we've perturbed education to such an extent that our students can no longer function without their AI helpers.

An anonymous reader shared this article from the Washington Post: A student taking an online quiz sees a button appear in their Chrome browser: "homework help." Soon, Google's artificial intelligence has read the question on-screen and suggests "choice B" as the answer. The temptation to cheat was suddenly just two clicks away Sept. 2, when Google quietly added a "homework help" button to Chrome, the world's most popular web browser. The button has been appearing automatically on the kinds of course websites used by the majority of American college students and many high-schoolers, too. Pressing it launches Google Lens, a service that reads what's on the page and can provide an "AI Overview" answer to questions — including during tests.

Educators I've spoken with are alarmed. Schools including Emory University, the University of Alabama, the University of California at Los Angeles and the University of California at Berkeley have alerted faculty how the button appears in the URL box of course sites and their limited ability to control it.

Chrome's cheating tool exemplifies Big Tech's continuing gold rush approach to AI: launch first, consider consequences later and let society clean up the mess. "Google is undermining academic integrity by shoving AI in students' faces during exams," says Ian Linkletter, a librarian at the British Columbia Institute of Technology who first flagged the issue to me. "Google is trying to make instructors give up on regulating AI in their classroom, and it might work. Google Chrome has the market share to change student behavior, and it appears this is the goal."

Several days after I contacted Google about the issue, the company told me it had temporarily paused the homework help button — but also didn't commit to keeping it off. "Students have told us they value tools that help them learn and understand things visually, so we're running tests offering an easier way to access Lens while browsing," Google spokesman Craig Ewer said in a statement.

Just days after federal data revealed average reading, math and science scores dropped among certain grades since before the coronavirus pandemic, a U.S. Senate panel on Thursday picked apart the root causes and methods for students' academic improvement. From a report: The hearing in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions centered on the "state of K-12 education" -- which GOP members on the committee described as "troubling" -- in light of recent data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP.

NAEP, regarded as the gold standard for tracking students' academic performance, showed that average science scores for eighth-graders decreased by 4 points since before the pandemic, in 2019. Average math and reading scores for 12th-graders also fell 3 points between 2019 and 2024. The assessments were administered between January and March of 2024. Results also showed that just one-third of 12th-graders are considered academically prepared for college in math -- a drop from 37% in 2019.

The committee's chair, Sen. Bill Cassidy, said "it should concern us that children's reading, math and science scores have yet to recover to pre-pandemic levels." The Louisiana Republican added that "success in education is not determined by how much we spend, but by who makes the decision and how wisely resources are directed," and "when states and local communities are empowered to tailor solutions to meet the unique needs of students, innovation follows." On the other hand, Sen. Bernie Sanders, ranking member of the panel, said that "while we focus on education -- as important as that is -- we also have to focus on the conditions under which our children are living."

Gallup: A record-low 35% of Americans are satisfied with the quality of education that K-12 students receive in the U.S. today, marking an eight-percentage-point decline since last year. This is one point below the previous historical low recorded in 2000 and 2023 for this Gallup question that dates back to 1999.

Several other ratings of the U.S. K-12 education system provide a similarly bleak assessment. Only about one-quarter of Americans think K-12 schools are headed in the right direction, while just one in five rate them as "excellent" or "good" at preparing students for today's jobs and one in three say the same for college.

Yet, parents of current K-12 students are nearly twice as satisfied with their own child's education as they are with education in the U.S. K-12 parents are also slightly more likely than U.S. adults in general to rate different aspects of education positively, including the direction of education in the U.S. and schools' preparation of students for the workforce and for college. Still, none of these ratings is near the majority level.

Gallup: Americans have been placing less importance on the value of a college education over the past 15 years, to the point that about a third (35%) now rate it as "very important." Forty percent think it is "fairly important," while 24% say it is "not too important."

When last asked to rate the importance of college in 2019, just over half of U.S. adults, 53%, said it was very important, but that was already lower than the 70% found in 2013 and 75% in 2010. Meanwhile, the percentage viewing college as not too important has more than doubled since 2019 and compares with just 4% in 2010. The views of parents of children under age 18 in the Aug. 1-20 poll are similar to the national average, with 38% rating college as very important, 40% somewhat important and 21% not too important.

Getting an MBA in the US has gotten a little more expensive and a little less profitable, according to a Bloomberg analysis of salary and tuition data. From the report: This year's update of Bloomberg's Business School ROI Calculator, based on surveys of more than 9,500 students and alumni, projects a typical return on investment of 12.3% a year for the decade after graduation. That's down from 13.3% last year. The S&P 500 index, by comparison, returned 14.6% over the decade ending Aug. 31.

The main reason for the decline: This year's respondents reported 6.2% better pre-MBA salaries than last year's, while projected postdegree earnings increased only 1.7%. In other words, the MBA pay edge -- the compensation boost graduates get for the degree -- shrank. In the broader US workforce, the average high-skilled worker's earnings rose 4.7% in the year ended July 31, Federal Reserve data show.

Other factors didn't help: The increase in pre-MBA salaries meant students were forgoing more income during their studies. Tuition and other expenses increased 2.4%, some of that financed with bigger loans at higher rates. In all, the typical total investment to get an MBA in the US rose 6.8%, to almost $300,000.

The UK's data-protecting Information Commissioner's Office has issued a warning about what it calls a worrying trend, reports the BBC: "students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares." Since 2022, the the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has investigated 215 hacks and breaches originating from inside education settings and says 57% were carried out by children. Other breaches are thought to come from staff, third party IT suppliers and other organisations with access. According to the new data, almost a third of the breaches involved students illegally logging into staff computer systems by guessing passwords or stealing details from teachers.

In one incident, a seven-year-old was involved in a data breach and subsequently referred to the National Crime Agency's Cyber Choices programme to help them understand the seriousness of their actions... In another incident three Year 11 students aged 15 or 16 unlawfully accessed school databases containing the personal information of more than 1,400 students. The pupils used hacking tools downloaded from the internet to break passwords and security protocols. When questioned, they said they were interested in cyber security and wanted to test their skills and knowledge. Another example the ICO gave is of a student illegally logging into their college's databases with a teachers' details to change or delete personal information belonging to more than 9,000 staff, students and applicants. The system stored personal information such as name and home address, school records, health data, safeguarding and pastoral logs and emergency contacts.

Schools are facing an increasing number of cyber attacks, with 44% of schools reporting an attack or breach in the last year according the government's most recent Cyber Security Breaches Survey.
"Youth cyber crime culture is a growing threat linked to English-speaking teen gangs," the article argues, noting breaches at major companies to suggest it's a kind of "gateway" crime.

The ICO's principal cyber specialist tells the BBC that "What starts out as a dare, a challenge, a bit of fun in a school setting can ultimately lead to children taking part in damaging attacks on organisations or critical infrastructure."

Newfoundland and Labrador's 10-year Education Accord report (PDF) intended to guide school reform has been found to contain at least 15 fabricated citations, including references to non-existent films and journals. Academics suggest the fake sources may have been generated by AI. "There are sources in this report that I cannot find in the MUN Library, in the other libraries I subscribe to, in Google searches. Whether that's AI, I don't know, but fabricating sources is a telltale sign of artificial intelligence," said Aaron Tucker, an assistant professor at Memorial whose current research focuses on the history of AI in Canada. "The fabrication of sources at least begs the question: did this come from generative AI?" CBC News reports: In one case, the report references a 2008 movie from the National Film Board called Schoolyard Games. The film doesn't exist, according to a spokesperson for the board. But the exact citation used in the report can be found in a University of Victoria style guide -- a document that clearly lists fake references designed as templates for researchers writing a bibliography. "Many citations in this guide are fictitious," reads the first page of the document.

"Errors happen. Made-up citations are a totally different thing where you essentially demolish the trustworthiness of the material," said Josh Lepawsky, the former president of the Memorial University Faculty Association who resigned from the report's advisory board last January, citing a "deeply flawed process" leading to "top-down" recommendations. The 418-page Education Accord NL report took 18 months to complete and was unveiled Aug. 28 by its co-chairs Anne Burke and Karen Goodnough, both professors at Memorial's Faculty of Education. The pair released the report alongside Education Minister Bernard Davis. "We are investigating and checking references, so I cannot respond to this at the moment," wrote Goodnough in an email declining an interview Thursday. In a statement, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development said it was aware of a "small number of potential errors in citations" in the report. "We understand that these issues are being addressed, and that the online report will be updated in the coming days to rectify any errors."

US colleges face a prolonged enrollment decline beginning this fall as high school graduating classes shrink for the first time since the Great Recession. The incoming freshman class marks the start of a 13% drop in high school graduates through 2041, falling from 3.9 million to 3.4 million students. The decline stems from reduced birth rates during the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent years.

Regional four-year institutions in the Northeast and Midwest states face potential applicant pool contractions of 15% or more. Small liberal arts colleges, comprising 40% of the higher education market, are particularly vulnerable. 40% of private colleges posted financial losses in 2023. Top-ranked schools in the US News top 50 are expected to experience minimal impact due to sustained national demand for limited seats.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News: Global warming in the United States is amping up the country's sweet tooth, a new study found. When the temperature rises, Americans -- especially those with less money and education -- drink lots more sugary beverages and a bit more frozen desserts. That amounts to more than 100 million pounds of added sugar (358 million kilograms) consumed in the nation a year, compared to 15 years earlier, according to a team of researchers in the U.S. and United Kingdom.

When temperatures go between 54 and 86 degrees (12 and 30 degrees Celsius), the amount of sugar the average American consumes goes up by about 0.4 grams per degree Fahrenheit (0.7 grams per degree Celsius) per day, based on researchers tracking of weather conditions and consumers' purchases. At 54 degrees, the amount of added sugar for the average American is a little more than 2 grams. At 86 degrees, it's more than 15 grams. Beyond that, appetites lessen and added sugar falls off, according to the study in Monday's Nature Climate Change.

"Climate change is shaping what you eat and how you eat and that might have a bad effect on your health," said study co-author Duo Chan, a climate scientist at the University of Southampton. "People tend to take in more sweetened beverages as the temperature is getting higher and higher," Chan said. "Obviously under a warming climate that would cause you to drink more or take in more sugar. And that is going to be a severe problem when it comes to health." The findings have been published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress shows U.S. high school seniors' math and reading scores at their lowest in decades, with nearly half failing to reach basic proficiency in math and one-third below basic in reading. The Associated Press reports: A decade-long slide in high schoolers' reading and math performance persisted during the COVID-19 pandemic, with 12th graders' scores dropping to their lowest level in more than 20 years, according to results released Tuesday from an exam known as the nation's report card. Eighth-grade students also lost significant ground in science skills, according to the results from the National Assessment of Education Progress.

The assessments were the first since the pandemic for eighth graders in science and 12th graders in reading and math. They reflect a downward drift across grade levels and subject areas in previous releases from NAEP, which is considered one of the best gauges of the academic progress of U.S. schools. "Scores for our lowest-performing students are at historic lows," said Matthew Soldner, the acting commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics. "These results should galvanize all of us to take concerted and focused action to accelerate student learning." [...]

In reading, the average score in 2024 was the lowest score in the history of the assessment, which began in 1992. Thirty-two percent of high school seniors scored below "basic," meaning they were not able to find details in a text to help them understand its meaning. In math, the average score in 2024 was the lowest since 2005, when the assessment framework changed significantly. On the test, 45% of high school seniors scored below "basic" achievement, the highest percentage since 2005. Only 33% of high school seniors were considered academically prepared for college-level math courses, a decline from 37% in 2019.

In 2016 comedian Dave Chappelle made headlines by requiring concert attendees to lock their cellphones in a pouch to prevent recording.

Nine years later those pouches (made by tech startup Yondr) are required for at least 2.5 million students in America, reports CBS News, "and the company said the number could triple after the 2025 numbers are tallied in about three months... Students in 35 states, including New York, Florida, Texas, California, Massachusetts and Georgia, now contend with laws or rules limiting phones and other electronic devices in school."

For example, The Yonkers School District purchased about 11,000 pouches, according to the article, "to comply with the statewide mandate that bans phones in classrooms." The pouch, which students carry with them, is locked and unlocked using magnets affixed to the entrance of the school and outside the main office... ["Some students have reported long lines and disruption at their schools," the article notes later, "as they wait to open their pouches." But on the first day of school at Yonkers, one student said the lines actually went pretty smoothly, and they ended up having a live conversation with a friend during lunch and "felt human"...] Other students were not so enthralled by the pouch; some reported seeing classmates bypass the Yondr pouch by using their Apple watches, buying "burner" phones and putting them in the pouch, breaking the pouch and other tricks to get to their phones.

[Yondr CEO Graham] Dugoni acknowledged that there will always be some students who can figure out how to get around the restrictions. The purpose of the pouches, he said, was to create a culture change in a school and create an environment conducive to their learning and development. More than 70% of high school teachers in the U.S. say cellphones are a major classroom distraction, according to the Pew Research Center Center.
Yondr CEO Graham Dugoni uses a flip phone, the article points out, and says "Our whole perspective is that it's not taking something away from students, it's giving them something back."

He says his larger mission is to create chances for people "to experience life outside of a fully digital realm" — and that Yondr now has school partners in all 50 U.S. states, and in 45 different countries: The cost of buying the pouches — roughly $25-30 per student — has set off debates around how schools should be spending their limited budgets. It's a particular issue for districts struggling with crumbling infrastructure, limited textbooks and access to other technology needed to learn...Districts in various states have reported spending from $26,000 to over $370,000, with Cincinnati Schools saying they spent $500,000 to provide pouches for students in grades 7-12.

Microsoft is giving away Microsoft 365 Personal subscriptions to all US college students. From a report: This subscription gives students free access to Microsoft's Office apps and the Copilot AI assistant integration for a year, after which the students are eligible for a 50 percent discount to continue the subscription.

While most students have access to education versions of Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace, Microsoft's offer is for student's own personal Microsoft accounts, and is available to claim until October 31st. Microsoft 365 Personal is usually $99.99 a year, or $9.99 a month, and includes 1TB of OneDrive cloud storage.

The SAT is billed as "a great way to find out how prepared students are for college." If that's true, recent changes to its format offer an unflattering assessment of the country's aspiring scholars, Bloomberg's editorial board wrote Wednesday. From the piece: [...] Then the pandemic hit. As in-person exams became impractical, hundreds of schools dropped their testing requirements. The SAT and its main competitor, the ACT, lost millions of dollars in revenue. Although both recently started offering digital options, schools have been slow to reinstate their requirements. Today, more than 80% of schools remain test-optional.

"If students are deciding to take a test," as one College Board executive put it, "how do we make the SAT the one they want to take?" To anyone familiar with American teenagers, the company's answer should come as no surprise: Make the test easier. The newly digitized format allows a calculator for the entire math section and drastically cuts reading comprehension. Gone are the 500- to 750-word passages about which students would answer a series of questions. Instead, test takers read 25- to 150-word excerpts -- about the length of a social media post -- and answer a single question about each.

[...] An effort by the College Board to reemphasize the benefits of deep reading -- for critical thinking, for self-reflection, for learning of all kinds -- might go a long way toward restoring some balance. It should build on efforts to incorporate college prep into school curricula, work with districts to develop coursework that builds reading stamina for all test takers, and consider reducing the cost of its subject-specific Advanced Placement exams that continue to test these skills (now $99), in line with the SAT ($68). Schools, for their part, should recommit to teaching books in their entirety.