Utah Valley University's high return on investment for students of all backgrounds earning national salutes
Michelle Jackson already possessed several of the qualities needed for college success: Ambition. Strong work ethic. Tenacity. And, finally, a vision for her personal and professional future.
But what Jackson needed were those educational opportunities that can be challenging to find for so-called 'First Gens.'
Jackson is a first generation immigrant and a first generation college student. She's also a young mother and a new homeowner — busy tackling the day-to-day tasks of caring for a couple of small children and helping to support a household.
Utah Valley University, said Jackson, is her ongoing source for those essential educational and mentoring opportunities.
'Anyone who wants to go to UVU has the same opportunities available to them. They make it really accessible for everyone,' she told the Deseret News.
The institutional opportunities being offered to Jackson and many of her classmates have earned UVU — the state's largest university by enrollment — an 'Opportunity College and University' designation by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.
The designation highlights UVU as 'a model for studying how campuses can create and support student success by providing more access to more people in their communities and fostering high earnings post-graduation,' according to a university release.
The UVU designation is part of a newly introduced Student Access and Earnings Classification, published this month by the Carnegie Foundation and the American Council on Education.
The new classification assesses how well institutions create opportunities for student success by measuring whether they enroll students who reflect the communities they serve and by comparing the graduates' earnings to their peers in the same areas.
Only 16% of the nation's colleges and universities received a similar 'Opportunity College and University' designation.
'As an open-access institution, UVU encourages students to 'Come as you are' and provides a high-quality education with seamless pathways to a degree, whether through vocational/community college offerings or four-year and master's programs,' said UVU Acting President Jim Mortensen in the release.
'This innovative model has resulted in strong job placement and competitive wages for our graduates, who consistently earn above the national median."
'This Carnegie Classification affirms that our student programs truly make a difference in fostering career success.'
UVU reports almost 75% of its graduates securing 'high-wage, high-demand' jobs with 4- or 5-star ratings by the Utah Department of Workforce Services in a variety of fields — including nursing, elementary education, engineering, computer science, finance and marriage and family therapy.
UVU leaders also point to the school's comprehensive approach to student support services as key to fostering an opportunity-rich campus.
The school's Student Success Center, for example, offers students of all backgrounds academic advising, tutoring, mentorship and wellness programs.
Meanwhile, the First-Generation Student Success Center and UVU's GEAR UP resource assistance program offer admissions-to-graduation guidance for students such as Jackson.
A Mexico City native, Jackson and her family moved to Provo when she was a little girl.
After graduating from Provo High School, she discovered a path to higher education via UVU's GEAR UP program. She began attending school, married and expected to follow a linear student path to Graduation Day.
But life intervened.
Family challenges and pregnancy prompted Jackson to step away from school.
But when she and her husband later found out they were expecting their second child, 'I decided I needed to be a good influence for my children and teach them the importance of education — so I re-enrolled at UVU.'
Excited to be back in class and pursuing educational goals, Jackson said she's been 'all in' during her second stint at the Orem school. She participated in the school's 'Presidential 100' program — enjoying the mentorship of UVU President Astrid Tuminez and others on campus.
Jackson remembers Tuminez encouraging her to chase and capture dreams.
'President Tuminez said, 'Go write down your dreams and start working on them. You really can accomplish these things.''
That sort of campus leadership and support has proven pivotal for Jackson and her family in purchasing their first home — and she's a year away from graduating with an accounting degree. She has her post-graduation eye on entrepreneurship.
Jackson added she has never felt unseen at UVU, despite the school's massive student body of almost 50,000.
'They do a wonderful job of connecting with everyone, individually,' she said.
Inside Higher Ed recently highlighted UVU's classification as an 'Opportunity University,' noting the school's commitment to first generation students and non-traditional students.
Kyle Reyes, vice president for institutional advancement at Utah Valley, said he attributes the university's high 'Return on Investment' for students to the institution's long-term investment in student success initiatives — and an unwillingness to deviate from its original mission as a broad-access institution.
Some of those efforts, Inside Higher Ed noted, have included partnerships with K-12 schools; helping students fill out federal financial aid applications; offering scholarships; academic advising; a food pantry; low-cost, on-campus childcare; student research opportunities; paid internships; and completion grants for returning students.
Recognition as an affordable pathway to economic stability through the new classification system is both 'validating' for Utah Valley and a 'game-changer' for all of higher education, Reyes told Inside Higher Ed.
'For so long, the incentives were for exclusion, prestige, lower admission rates and higher test scores — even though on the ground we knew the masses weren't being served by that model,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Majority of Utahns support spending cuts, say DOGE has been effective
WASHINGTON — A vast majority of Utah voters say they support cutting the size of the government as Congress works to approve spending cuts implemented by the Department of Government Efficiency earlier this year. Nearly 80% of Utahns say they support downsizing the government, according to a new poll conducted by HarrisX for the Deseret News. That sentiment was largely shared among those who identify themselves as Republican, with 91% saying they support compared to just 9% who said they oppose. Democratic voters were more split among themselves, as 47% said they supported cutting the size of the government compared to 53% who said the opposite, according to the poll. Since President Donald Trump was sworn into office in January, the DOGE commission has identified spending cuts officials say would save the government billions of dollars. Congress has begun the process of approving those cuts, although lawmakers — Republicans and Democrats like — are torn on whether they agree with what's on the chopping block. A majority (60%) of Utahns say DOGE has been effective at identifying spending cuts compared to just 40% who said the opposite, the poll shows. That opinion is largely split along party lines, as 80% of Republicans said DOGE was effective, with only 29% of Democrats saying the same. On the other hand, 71% of Democrats said DOGE was ineffective compared to just 20% of Republicans who agreed with that sentiment. But when it comes to DOGE cuts and slashed funding, Utah voters say they feel mostly unaffected. A majority of Utahns (67%) say they don't know anyone who has lost their job because of the DOGE cuts, according to the poll. About 12% say a close friend has lost their job, 8% say a family member and another 17% say an acquaintance lost their job due to the DOGE cuts. Roughly 4% report their job was terminated because of DOGE cuts, the poll shows. The poll was conducted between May 16-21 among 805 registered voters in Utah. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. Proposed spending cuts are already making their way through Congress, with the House approving a $9.4 billion rescissions package on Thursday targeting foreign aid as well as federal funding for organizations the Trump administration has accused of being anti-conservative. The package was opposed by all Democrats, and a handful of Republicans also opposed the package. However, it underscores a desire among Trump allies to codify the cuts identified by DOGE as 'waste, fraud, and abuse' as quickly as possible. The recent sentiments also come in contrast to Deseret News polling last month that showed Utah voters believe the federal government should spend more money in several different areas, with foreign funding a strong exception.
Newsweek
2 days ago
- Newsweek
Justice Jackson Warns of 'Reputational Cost' to Supreme Court After Ruling
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized the majority's ruling in a case over fuel providers challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of California's vehicle emissions regulations, writing in a Friday dissent that the decision comes at a "reputational cost" for the court, according to documents reviewed by Newsweek. She added that the decision gives "fodder" to the perception that "moneyed interests, enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens." Why It Matters In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the D.C. Circuit and sided with fuel producers, ruling they have Article III standing to challenge the EPA's approval of California's vehicle emissions regulations. California's regulations "require automakers to limit average greenhouse-gas emissions across their vehicle fleets and manufacture a certain percentage of electric vehicles," the lawsuit reads. Several fuel producers sued the EPA over its approval of California's regulations, arguing the agency exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act by approving regulations that target "global climate change rather than local California air quality problems." Jackson's dissent raised concerns about public perception of favoritism and the court being swayed by powerful interests. Confidence in the Supreme Court has steadily declined for decades, with 47 percent of Americans viewing the court favorably and 51 percent unfavorably, according to a 2024 Pew Research Center survey. In 1987, 76 percent held a favorable view, while just 17 percent viewed the court unfavorably. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson at her Senate confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on March 22, 2022. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson at her Senate confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on March 22, 2022. AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster What To Know In Diamond Alternative Energy v. Environmental Protection Agency, Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued the majority opinion, joined by Justice Elena Kagan, one of the court's liberals, holding that fuel producers have standing to challenge the EPA's approval of the California regulations. In her dissent, Jackson called out the majority's application of "standing doctrine," writing that "When courts adjust standing requirements to let certain litigants challenge the actions of the political branches but preclude suits by others with similar injuries, standing doctrine cannot perform its constraining function." She argued that "Over time, such selectivity begets judicial overreach and erodes public trust in the impartiality of judicial decision making." Jackson's dissent says the court is "setting us down that path." "I worry that the fuel industry's gain comes at a reputational cost for this Court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests," she said later in the opinion. Jackson argues that this perception, and even a mere "'appearance' of favoritism, founded or not," can undermine public confidence in the highest court. Justice Sonia Sotomayor also dissented, filing a separate opinion and not joining Jackson's. What People Are Saying Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, told NBC on Friday: "I don't think this case is an example of the court being inconsistent or somehow more favorable to moneyed interests than other sorts of interests. It's not like the court has closed the door on environmental groups." Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion: "Justice Jackson separately argues that the Court does not apply standing doctrine 'evenhandedly'...A review of standing cases over the last few years disproves that suggestion." Beth Milito, vice president of the National Federation of Independent Business' Small Business Legal Center, which filed an amicus brief in the case, said in a Friday press release: "Small businesses have the right to challenge overreach by government agencies and seek relief from harmful regulatory actions. The D.C. Circuit's opinion set an unreasonable standard for plaintiffs to prove that the court can remedy their injury. This would have made it nearly impossible for indirectly regulated parties to challenge regulating agencies. NFIB applauds the Court for reversing the lower court's opinion and ensuring that small businesses have a clear course of action and a fair chance at proving that the court can provide suitable relief." Kristen Waggoner, president and chief counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom, who filed an amicus brief in the case, said Friday on X (formerly Twitter): "The ruling in Diamond Alternative Energy v. EPA has significant implications beyond just environmental SCOTUS ruling will help plaintiffs, like these churches, hold the government accountable when its regulations have the downstream effect of violating their fundamental rights. An important win." What Happens Next The Supreme Court is expected to release a slew of opinions in the coming weeks, with the term scheduled to end in late June.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
In a scathing dissent, Justice Jackson says the Supreme Court gives the impression it favors 'moneyed interests'
WASHINGTON — Liberal Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized her colleagues on Friday in a scathing dissent on a case involving vehicle emissions regulations. In her dissenting opinion, she argued that the court's opinion gives the impression it favors 'moneyed interests' in the way they decide which cases to hear and how they rule in them. The court had ruled 7-2 in favor of fuel producers seeking to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's approval of California clean vehicle emissions regulations. She also said she was concerned that the ruling could have "a reputational cost for this court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests." With the Trump administration reversing course on many of Biden's environmental policies, including on California's electric vehicle mandates, the case is likely moot, or soon to be, Jackson wrote, making her wonder why the court felt the need to decide it. "This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this court than ordinary citizens," Jackson wrote. The case said that the producers had legal standing to bring their claims, resting on a theory "that the court has refused to apply in cases brought by less powerful plaintiffs," she added. The decision has little practical importance now, but in future, "will no doubt aid future attempts by the fuel industry to attack the Clean Air Act," she said. "Also, I worry that the fuel industry's gain comes at a reputational cost for this court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests," she added. The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has often faced claims that it is particularly receptive to arguments made by big business. The conservative justices have been especially skeptical of broad government regulations and they have consistently made it harder for consumers and workers to bring class action lawsuits. Last year, the court overturned a 40-year precedent much loathed by business interests that empowered federal agencies in the regulatory process. Some legal experts have pushed back, saying such allegations are misleading. Jackson concluded her dissent by noting the court's "simultaneous aversion to hearing cases involving the potential vindication of less powerful litigants — workers, criminal defendants, and the condemned, among others." Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who authored the majority opinion, responded to her claims, saying that a review of standing cases "disproves that suggestion." He mentioned several recent rulings in which liberal justices were in the majority, including one last year finding that anti-abortion doctors who challenged the abortion pill mifepristone did not have standing to sue. The bottom line, he added, is that the government "may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders." Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law whose scholarship pushes back on Jackson's theory, said it was notable that no other justices, including her two fellow liberals, signed on to her dissent. "I don't think this case is an example of the court being inconsistent or somehow more favorable to moneyed interests than other sorts of interests," he said in an interview with NBC News. "It's not like the court has closed the door on environmental groups." Adler, who Jackson cited in her dissent, said it can be "very simplistic" to classify cases as pro-business or anti-business simply because there can often be wealthy interests on both sides. The underlying case stems from the EPA's authority to issue national vehicle emissions standards under the federal Clean Air Act. In recognition of California's historic role in regulating emissions, the law allows the EPA to give the state a waiver from the nationwide standards so that it can adopt its own. The case focused on a request made by California in 2012 that EPA approve new regulations, not the state's 2024 plan to eliminate gasoline-powered cars by 2035 for which it also sought a waiver. The Republican-controlled Congress voted earlier this month to revoke that waiver. This article was originally published on
