The press release noted that Van Horn’s vision for Jewell’s future emphasized “personalized education rooted in the liberal arts and humanities, aimed at preparing students for successful careers and civic engagement in a constantly changing world.” His experience includes tenures as the president of Brevard College in North Carolina and Young Harris College in Georgia, both of which had or continue to have affiliations with the Methodist church.

It is not surprising that the Trustees have chosen Van Horn as interim president given the new direction of the College under the Reimagine Jewell initiative. Bill Gautreaux, chair of the Board of Trustees, noted that Van Horn’s “[unique] data driven results-oriented focus” would help the College “build on Jewell’s long history of academic excellence and student success.” It is unclear what emphasizing a “results-oriented focus” means at this time for programs and faculty, given cuts to both last year.

A New Direction

In an interview with Higher Education Digest, Van Horn outlined a myriad of policy outcomes for smaller private colleges that he believed would help them flourish. Two of his policy proposals are particularly relevant in viewing the way Van Horn will lead the College.

First, Van Horn emphasized that “[i]nstitutions must continue to identify low-producing majors and eliminate them from their offerings.” As Jewell thins its program offerings (having eliminated majors in International Relations, Mathematics, Oxbridge, Philosophy, Spanish, and Theatre this past year, among others), Jewell administration appears to have already emphasized identifying and removing “lower-producing majors” in an effort to reduce program spending.

Second, Van Horn emphasized that colleges, especially small private colleges, must “refocus the Boards, alumni, faculty, and staff on the mission of the institutions… focus on the type of student that [they] historically served and determine if this was still the mission for the institutions.” This includes, where necessary, “reducing the number of hours in the core curriculum” and changing the institution’s focus from core curriculum to double majors or certificates that enable student success, particularly in the workforce. As Jewell becomes more diverse and moves away from its Baptist roots, College administrators must decide whether to double down on Jewell’s historical mission or upend it.

No matter one’s feelings about Critical Thought and Inquiry (CTI) classes, it is clear that the Reimagine Jewell initiative, under the leadership of Van Horn, represents a significant shift for William Jewell College and its administration. Will Van Horn lead a shift out of exigency and toward a flourishing Jewell? Or will the College lose sight of the liberal arts emphasis that has caused its success for so long?

As usual, only time will tell.
The Hilltop Monitor is committed to publishing a range of Letters to the Editor. If you have thoughts on this piece, please send us your letters via the Contact Us page.

If you’ve been looking for a blog about anything, whether philosophy or Philadelphia, AI or angels, you’ve probably encountered the blogging platform Substack. Even Substack has a Substack page. The platform markets itself as a “subscription network for independent writers and creators”—a centralized platform for which writers, bloggers, and journalists can publish their ideas. Yet for many popular creators and writers, Substack is their livelihood. 

For a simple blogging platform, the company has encountered unprecedented success. It’s valued at $1.1 billion. How has the platform become so popular? This article looks at the rise of Substack, touching on the short-form sinkhole, the fall of Twitter, and the increasing necessity to monetize the Internet.

How did we get here?

The rise of Substack can be understood by a three-part shift in the way people consume, think about and share social media content.

In the last five to seven years, social media has shifted from photo-sharing and Twitter threads to an emphasis on short-form content. The rise of TikTok as a popular platform prompted rivals Instagram and Facebook (both owned by Meta) to launch their own short-form offerings with Reels. YouTube followed suit with YouTube Shorts. While short-form content made these platforms significant amounts of money, some users disliked the forcing of short-form content (several popular social media platforms limited their users to 140 280 characters).

The algorithms of social media platforms have changed the way people speak. Adam Aleksic (better known as @etymologynerd on various social media platforms) told Reuters that in efforts to avoid certain sensitive words that would get flagged by algorithms, users have used other words to convey the same meaning. If you’ve ever heard someone use the word “unalive” (a word I absolutely despise, although that’s probably an article for the Opinion section), you’ve witnessed the way algorithms affect language.

Those who disliked short-form content didn’t have many places to go; those who created long-form content had even fewer places to go. A downturn in traditional journalism meant that the standard instant-news website was Twitter (when it was still known by that moniker). Elon Musk’s takeover and rebrand to X has driven many users away from the platform, opening the doors for companies such as Mastodon and BlueSky. Furthermore, built-in X features such as xAI’s Grok began generating other problems for users and advertisers.

With short-form content on the rise and traditional platforms no longer available, long-form writers and academics jumped at the opportunity to use a long-form content platform. One scientist who made the move cited “[having] a whole lot more ownership” over the content they produce and not being tied to a schedule. 

Since moving from social media to Substack requires forgoing platform advertising revenue, authors have begun monetizing paid Substacks similar to news subscriptions. Top creators exceed $500,000 in annual revenue, with most revenue earned from subscriptions going directly to creators. (Substack takes a 10% cut of subscription revenue to cover its overhead costs; its payment provider, Square, takes an additional 3%.)

While the platform’s lax moderation policy has occasionally caused issues, Substack has risen to become a feasible alternative for long-form content creation. For those looking to create blogs, discover new voices, or consume information, Substack may be a platform worth considering.

Have you spent the past few weeks wrapped up in Cousins Beach? If you answered yes then you and a majority of Gen-Z have something in common. The Summer I Turned Pretty has taken over the end of summer by storm, and the battle between Team Jermiah and Team Conrad is getting more intense by the minute. However, this exciting classic didn’t start on the screen; it began as a book series written by Jenny Han. The books are what originally began this beloved series, but I think it’s safe to say that the show has proven to be a better platform for the story. 

 The books begin similarly to the show as the main character, Belly, is excited for summer to begin. Belly spends every summer at Cousins Beach with the Fisher family, specifically brothers Jeremiah and Conrad. The story in both plotlines follows her throughout her choice between the two boys as she completes side quests along the way. However, the way this plot is conveyed between the two platforms is vastly different. In the show, the story is engaging and keeps the viewer on the edge of their seats. The audience is able to follow the fast yet concise episodes with ease and is still left wanting more. The book, on the other hand, is a completely different story (no pun intended). 

The first book in the series is hectic and doesn’t allow the reader to get to know the characters well. In the show, the viewer is introduced to Belly’s brother, her best friend, her mom and Susannah the mother of the Fisher boys. Whereas in the book, it glosses over Belly’s relationship with almost anyone who isn’t Jermiah or Conrad. This doesn’t leave much room for character development or story progression as the series continues. Following this, there are plot holes throughout the first book as the reader struggles to connect dots. At one point in the book, Jeremiah confesses his feelings to Belly, and she isn’t sure how to feel about it at the time. Then the book fast forwards through important details only for it to end abruptly to make room for a second book. 

The novel seems more focused on finishing the story then actually taking the time to build a connection with the reader. Therefore, the show seems like a do-over where Jenny Han was able to develop her story into what it was meant to be originally. The show takes the opportunity to engage the reader on a personal level by allowing them to participate in the story arc as it plays out. You are sad when Belly’s sad, and you’re frustrated when she is making difficult decisions. All in all, you can see the process of the story take form in a brighter light with the show’s storyline as opposed to the books’. 

For the reader and viewer’s sake, the better storyline can be found in the critically acclaimed show. Not only is there a visible emotional connection between the characters, but the story takes its time to progress and blossom into something beautiful. As the last couple episodes are released in the coming weeks, audiences will be kept wondering what will happen next and if the right choice will be made. There’s only a little bit of summer left in Cousins and it’s time to see where Belly’s heart truly lies.

The return of Donald Trump to the White House after his victory in the 2024 Presidential election has altered nearly every aspect of American policy, and the world of higher education is in no way immune from these changes. Trump’s public fights with the Ivy League and other elite colleges have taken most of the media attention, but colleges across the nation have experienced their own share of changes, as have the students attending them. 

Admissions, Affirmative Action and International Students

Since his inauguration earlier this year, Trump has focused heavily on reforming a college system that his administration argues is financially bloated and biased against white applicants. Much of the administration’s reforms have focused on eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, particularly surrounding affirmative action, which was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2023. 

The administration argues that colleges have continued to apply affirmative action, primarily through proxy measures such as personal statements, in making acceptance decisions, and Trump has released a barrage of executive orders on that subject. Last month Trump signed a new order that forces colleges to share data about their applicant pools and acceptances, giving the Department of Education power to investigate these alleged proxies. 

The Department of Education, meanwhile, had threatened to cut federal funding to institutions that it claims engaged in race-based decision making, though these threats have been caught up in court. These latest orders follow an immediate effort within the opening days of the second Trump presidency to eliminate DEI resources and initiatives from the Department of Education’s website, as well as directing the various branches of government to identify and investigate colleges, corporations and foundations with DEI initiatives. 

The administration has also attempted to restrict international students, both in the numbers that can be admitted and in the length of time they can remain. Trump’s attacks against international students have so far targeted individual schools, such as his suspension of visas for students studying at Harvard or his requirement that Columbia “decrease financial dependence on international student enrollment”. However, the administration has begun to move from changing the rules for individual schools to changing the rules for all international students. 

One recent memo from the Department of Homeland Security proposes to restrict student visas to a duration of four years. At present, student visas have “duration of status,” which permits students to remain in the country while they continue to make progress towards a degree. Critics argue that restricting student visas to a four-year term will prevent international students from completing a bachelor’s degree program if they require time beyond the standard 4-year plan and will limit their ability to participate in doctoral programs that frequently last five years or more.

Student Loan Changes

While the Trump administration’s policy has influenced admissions policy and diversity initiatives across higher education,  changes to student loans and financial aid will most directly impact students. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) has implemented a series of restrictions on federal borrowing. Parent PLUS loans, which typically helped cover the gap between student loan limits and the rising cost of college, have been capped, maxing out at $20,000 annually and $65,000 total per student. When combined with the $7,500 annual limit for undergraduate federal loans, that limits families to $27,500 per year in federal loans. With the average annual cost of undergraduate education reaching $38,270, these federal loan caps will leave students with, on average, over 10 thousand dollars still to cover, either out of their own pockets, through scholarships or through the private loan market.

For those seeking a graduate education, the OBBBA has eliminated Graduate PLUS loans and added additional caps to federal borrowing. Graduate students are now only permitted to take out a maximum of $20,500 per year, while professional students (those in medical school, law school, and other similar programs providing training for a specific job) can take out a maximum of $50,000 per year. With the average annual tuition cost of medical school at $59,605 and the average tuition cost of a masters’ degree being $62,820 over two years, graduate students will likewise need to find approximately ten thousand dollars in additional funding to cover the cost of their degrees.

The OBBBA has also reduced the variety of loan repayment options. Previously, federal loans provided multiple income-driven repayment options to help lower-income students pay back their loans, and President Biden expanded that list by signing the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) plan into law last year. However, the OBBBA replaces these plans with the new Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP), which now becomes the only alternative to a standard fixed-payment plan. 

The RAP has a minimum monthly payment of $10 (SAVE had no minimum monthly payment), has a term length of 30 years (SAVE had a 20-year term, or 25 years for graduate loans) and begins counting its income percentage immediately (SAVE ignored the first $35,000 of income). This collectively means that a borrower making $40,000 annually would see their monthly payment increase from $40 under the SAVE plan to $132 under the new plan. RAP does, however, provide substantial discounts for those with dependent children, and is generally a less expensive plan for those with higher incomes.

In short, the OBBBA has reduced both the scale of federal loans and the variety of repayment plans that exist for both undergraduate and graduate education. In the immediate future, more students will have to seek alternate sources of funding, whether those be private loans or additional external financial aid/scholarships. The decline in international students, who typically pay higher tuition prices, will make the scholarship budgets even tighter at many institutions. It’s unclear just how many students will be forced to reconsider their educational plans because of these changes, but the tradeoffs of higher education will certainly become more relevant than ever in the coming years.