Education

p]:text-cms-story-body-color-text clearfix”>

It would be nice if the Dodgers could schedule a special day to honor Austin Barnes and Chris Taylor, giving fans and teammates a chance to provide a proper farewell for this pair of beloved, true-blue Dodgers.

Anthony Moretti
Lomita

I’m sure Taylor and Barnes are nice guys, but they’ve been making millions of dollars and haven’t performed for years. I don’t think anyone has to feel sorry for them.

Mike Schaller
Temple City

Fans of ’70s-era sci-fi movies can see clear parallels between the classic “Logan’s Run” and the Dodgers’ front office behavior. Like the movie’s plot, the Dodgers have concluded that former impact players now over age 30 are expendable and must be immediately eliminated. The struggling Max Muncy, Kiké Hernández must be taking note.

Rob Fleishman
Placentia

The administration of President Donald Trump has taken a hard line against top US universities over their responses to pro-Palestine protests, as well as their diversity initiatives and curricula.

The move on Thursday to block Harvard University from enrolling foreign students represents the latest escalation in a months-long standoff, which critics say has been rooted in unfounded claims of rampant anti-Semitism.

In a statement, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said the administration was “holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus”.

Harvard has called the latest move “unlawful” and a “retaliatory action”.

Here’s how we got here:

December 2023: The standoff stretches back to the months following the October 7, 2023 attack on southern Israel, and the resulting Israeli offensive on Gaza, in which at least 53,655 Palestinians have since been killed.

Then-Harvard President Claudine Gay’s testimony before Congress on the administration’s response to pro-Palestine protests sparks outrage, as elected officials, particularly Republicans, call for greater crackdowns.

Gay subsequently resigns from her post and is replaced by Alan Garber in August 2024.

January 2025: Trump takes office in January 2025, following a campaign where he vowed to crack down on pro-Palestine protests, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes, and “woke ideology” on college campuses.

Trump also signs a series of executive orders calling for government agencies to take actions against DEI programmes at private institutions, including universities, and to increase government actions to combat anti-Semitism, particularly on campuses.

February 2025: The US Department of Justice (DOJ) launches a task force to “root out anti-Semitic harassment in schools and on college campuses”.

The task force later announces it will visit 10 schools, saying it was “aware of allegations that the schools may have failed to protect Jewish students and faculty members from unlawful discrimination, in potential violation of federal law”.

The schools include Harvard, as well as Columbia University, George Washington University, Johns Hopkins University, New York University, Northwestern University, the University of California, Los Angeles, the University of California, Berkeley, the University of Minnesota, and the University of Southern California.

March 7, 2025: The Trump administration takes its first action against a US university, slashing $400m in federal funding to Columbia University and accusing the school of “continued inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students”.

A subsequent letter from the Department of Education warns Harvard and dozens of other universities of “potential enforcement actions”.

March 21, 2025: Columbia yields to Trump’s demands, which include banning face masks, empowering campus police with arresting authority, and installing a new administrator to oversee the department of Middle East, South Asian and African Studies and the Center for Palestine Studies.

March 31, 2025: The US Departments of Education (ED), Health and Human Services (HHS), and the US General Services Administration (GSA) announce an official review of $255.6m in Harvard contracts and $8.7bn in multi-year grants.

The review is part of the “ongoing efforts of the Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism”, the statement said.

April 11, 2025: Harvard is sent a letter saying the university has “failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment” and listing several Trump administration demands.

The demands include a governance overhaul that lessens the power of students and some staff, reforming hiring and admissions practices, refusing to admit students deemed “hostile to the American values and institutions”, doing away with diversity programmes, and auditing several academic programmes and centres, including several related to the Middle East.

April 14, 2025: Harvard President Garber issues a forceful rejection of the demands, writing: “The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights”.

The US administration announces an immediate freeze on funding, including $2.2bn in multi-year grants and $60m in multi-year contracts.

April 15, 2025: In a Truth Social post, Trump floats that Harvard could lose “Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity”. He accuses Harvard of “pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting ‘Sickness’”.

April 16, 2025: The Department of Homeland Security calls on Harvard to turn over records on any foreign students’ “illegal and violent activities”, while threatening to revoke the university’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program approval. The certification is required for it to enrol foreign students. Noem gives an April 30 deadline for this.

April 21, 2025: Harvard files a lawsuit against the Trump administration, accusing it of violating the First Amendment of the US Constitution with “arbitrary and capricious” funding cuts.

April 30, 2025: Harvard says it shared information requested by Noem regarding foreign students, but does not release the nature of the information provided.

May 2, 2025: Trump again says the administration will take away Harvard’s tax-exempt status. No action is immediately taken.

May 5, 2025: The Trump administration says it is cutting all new federal grants to Harvard.

May 13, 2025: The US Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism announces another $450m in federal funding from eight federal agencies.

May 19, 2025: The DOJ announces it will use the False Claims Act, typically used to punish federal funding recipients accused of corruption, to crack down on universities like Harvard over DEI policies. The Department of Health and Human Services also says it is terminating $60m in federal grants to Harvard.

May 22, 2025: Noem announces revocation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program, blocking it from enrolling new foreign students and saying current students will need to transfer to continue their studies.

Harvard responds: “We are fully committed to maintaining Harvard’s ability to host our international students and scholars, who hail from more than 140 countries and enrich the university – and this nation – immeasurably.”

President Donald Trump appears with Education Secretary Linda McMahon in March, when Trump issued an executive order that sought to close the department, despite the Department of Education Organization Act that clearly prohibits that from the executive branch. File Photo by Jim Lo Scalzo/UPI | License Photo

May 22 (UPI) — A federal judge in Massachusetts issued an injunction Thursday that blocks the Trump administration from its plan to dismantle the Department of Education, and that those employees recently fired from the department be rehired.

U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun stated in his ruling: “The Department must be able to carry out its functions and its obligations under the [Department of Education Organization Act] and other relevant statutes as mandated by Congress.”

Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann stated Thursday that the administration “will immediately challenge this on an emergency basis.”

Joun ruled on the first civil action that was filed by the State of New York against Education Department Secretary Linda McMahon and Somerville Public Schools of Massachusetts against President Donald Trump that stated “a preliminary injunction is warranted to return the Department to the status quo such that it can comply with its statutory obligations.”

President Donald Trump had issued an executive order in March that sought to close the department, despite the Department of Education Organization Act, which shows that as the Department was created by Congress, it can only be closed by an act of Congress.

May 21 (UPI) — Education Secretary Linda McMahon, testifying before a House subcommittee on Wednesday, defended a 15.3% leaner budget from last year as part of the department’s “final mission.”

President Donald Trump‘s budget request would cut funding to the Education Department by about $12 billion to wind down the agency. The House bill allocated $30.9 billion and the Senate version $31.9 billion.

She said her top priorities are support for charter schools, which would receive a $60 million funding increase, as well as improving literacy rates and returning education to states. Charters schools are the only ones with a budget funding rise.

“The fiscal year ’26 budget will take a significant step toward that goal,” McMahon told legislators on the House Committee on Appropriations’ education subcommittee. “We seek to shrink federal bureaucracy, save taxpayer money and empower states who best know their local needs to manage education in this country.”

As Republicans supported her plans, Democrats blasted her.

“By recklessly incapacitating the department you lead, you are usurping Congress’ authority and infringing on Congress’ power of the purse,” Rosa DeLauro, of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the appropriations committee, said.

She decried cuts for higher education.

“Your visions for students aspiring to access and pay for college is particularly grim,” DeLauro said. “Some families do not need financial assistance to go to college, but that’s not true for the rest.”

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, of New Jersey, also blasted states gaining greater authority.

“I’m asking you, do you realize that to send authority back to the states, to eliminate your oversight, to eliminate your accountability, to eliminate your determination as to resources going to schools that are teaching public schools that are teaching underserved communities, this will result in the very reason that we had to get the involvement of our government in this, and that’s a yes or no,” she said.

“It isn’t a yes or no, but I will not respond to any questions based on the theory that this administration doesn’t care anything about the law and operates outside it,” McMahon responded.

Coleman said: “From the president of the United States conducting himself in a corrupt manner to his family enriching him and himself corruptly … I’m telling you, the Department of Education is one of the most important departments in this country and you should feel shameful [to] be engaged with an administration that doesn’t give a damn.”

McMahon said she is not trying to remove 8% to 10% that goes to states, and instead moving programs to other departments.

She described her agency as a federal funding “pass-through mechanism” and other agencies could take over the job of distributing allocations from Congress.

“Whether the channels of that funding are through HHS [Health and Human Services], or whether they’re funneled through the DOJ (Department of Jusrtice], or whether they’re funneled through the Treasury or SBA [Smal Business Administration] or other departments, the work is going to continue to get done,” McMahon said.

Plans are to move the student loan programs to the SBA, which McMahon was the administrator during the first Trump administration.

The reductions include eliminating two federal programs designed at improving college access for disadvantaged, TRIO, and low-income students, Gear Up, at a cost of $1.6 billion. Also, the federal Work-Study Program would shift responsibility to states, and funding would be eliminated for Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants to undergraduate students.

And funding would be reduced 35%, or about $49 million, for the already-scaled back Office for Civil Rights, which investigates harassment and discrimination on college campuses and in K-12 schools.

The budget shifts funding from programs supporting diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

She said full funding would remain for Title I-A, which allocates funds to schools with the highest percentages of children from low-income families, and those with the Disabilities Education Act for free public education and support services for children with disabilities.

“Here we are today with a Department of Education that was really stood up in 1980 by President Carter,” McMahon said. “We’ve spent over $3 trillion during that time, and every year we have seen our scores continue to either stagnate or fall. It is clear that we are not doing something right.”

On March 20,, Trump signed an executive order directing McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.”

Six days earlier, the agency announced a workforce reduction that would cut nearly 50% of employees, 1,315.

The department, already the smallest Cabinet-level agency before the recent layoffs, distributed roughly $242 billion to students, K-12 schools and universities in the 2024 fiscal year. The fiscal year ends Sept. 30.

Public spending cuts across six African countries have resulted in the incomes of health and education workers falling by up to 50 percent in five years, leaving them struggling to make ends meet, according to international NGO ActionAid.

The Human Cost of Public Sector Cuts in Africa report published on Tuesday found that 97 percent of the healthcare workers it surveyed in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi and Nigeria could not cover their basic needs like food and rent with their wages.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is to blame for these countries’ failing public systems, the report said, as the agency advises governments to significantly cut public spending to pay back foreign debt. As the debt crisis rapidly worsens across the Global South, more than three-quarters of all low-income countries in the world are spending more on debt servicing than healthcare.

“The debt crisis and the IMF’s insistence on cuts to public services in favour of foreign debt repayments have severely hindered investments in healthcare and education across Africa. For example, in 2024, Nigeria allocated only 4% of its national revenue to health, while a staggering 20.1% went toward repaying foreign debt,” said ActionAid Nigeria’s Country Director Andrew Mamedu.

The report highlighted how insufficient budgets in the healthcare system had resulted in chronic shortages and a decline in the quality of service.

Women also appear to be disproportionally affected.

“In the past month, I have witnessed four women giving birth at home due to unaffordable hospital fees. The community is forced to seek vaccines and immunisation in private hospitals since they are not available in public hospitals. Our [local] health services are limited in terms of catering for pregnant and lactating women,” said a healthcare worker from Kenya, who  ActionAid identified only as Maria.

Medicines for malaria – which remains a leading cause of death across the African continent, especially in young children and pregnant women – are now 10 times more expensive at private facilities, the NGO said. Millions don’t have access to lifesaving healthcare due to long travel distances, rising fees and a medical workforce shortage.

“Malaria is an epidemic in our area [because medication is now beyond the reach of many]. Five years ago, we could buy [antimalarial medication] for 50 birrs ($0.4), but now it costs more than 500 birr ($4) in private health centres,” a community member from Muyakela Kebele in Ethiopia, identified only as Marym, told ActionAid.

‘Delivering quality education is nearly impossible’

The situation is equally dire in education, as budget cuts have led to failing public education systems crippled by rising costs, a shortage of learning materials and overcrowded classrooms.

Teachers report being overwhelmed by overcrowded classrooms, with some having to manage more than 200 students. In addition, about 87 percent of teachers said they lacked basic classroom materials, with 73 percent saying they paid for the materials themselves.

Meanwhile, teachers’ wages have been gradually falling, with 84 percent reporting a 10-15 percent drop in their income over the past five years.

“I often struggle to put enough food on the table,” said a teacher from Liberia, identified as Kasor.

Four of the six countries included in the report are spending less than the recommended one-fifth of their national budget on education, according to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

“I now believe teaching is the least valued profession. With over 200 students in my class and inadequate teaching and learning materials, delivering quality education is nearly impossible,” said a primary school teacher in Malawi’s Rumphi District, identified as Maluwa.

Action Aid said its report shows that the consequences of IMF-endorsed policies are far-reaching. Healthcare workers and educators are severely limited in the work they can do, which has direct consequences on the quality of services they can provide, it said.

“The debt crisis and drive for austerity is amplified for countries in the Global South and low-income countries, especially due to an unfair global economic system held in place by outdated institutions, such as the IMF,” said Roos Saalbrink, the global economic justice lead at ActionAid International. “This means the burden of debt falls on those most marginalised – once again. This must end.”

Government says funding freeze is due to the university’s alleged failure to address anti-Semitism on campus.

The United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has said it is terminating $60m in federal grants to Harvard University, further escalating an ongoing feud between the Ivy Leave institute and President Donald Trump’s administration over alleged anti-Semitism, presidential control and the limits of academic freedom.

“Due to Harvard University’s continued failure to address anti-Semitic harassment and race discrimination, HHS is terminating multiple multi-year grant awards – totalling approximately $60 million over their full duration,” the department said on X on Monday.

It said discrimination will “not be tolerated” on campus, adding that “federal funds must support institutions that protect all students.”

HHS is taking decisive action to uphold civil rights in higher education. Due to Harvard University’s continued failure to address anti-Semitic harassment and race discrimination, HHS is terminating multiple multi-year grant awards—totaling approximately $60 million over their… pic.twitter.com/99aUd4ZVYF

— HHS.gov (@HHSGov) May 20, 2025

The Trump administration has already frozen more than $2.2bn in federal grants to Harvard.

Education Department Secretary Linda McMahon also announced earlier this month that the university would no longer be receiving public funding for research as it had made a “mockery” of higher education, in a letter addressed to Harvard.

“Harvard will cease to be a publicly funded institution, and can instead operate as a privately-funded institution, drawing on its colossal endowment, and raising money from its large base of wealthy alumni,” McMahon wrote in the letter.

Harvard has sued the administration in response, alleging that the funding freeze violates the First Amendment and federal law, which bars the president from directly or indirectly ordering the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to conduct or terminate an audit or investigation.

Harvard President Alan Garber announced last week that the university will use $250m of its own funds to support research.

The feud between the president and Harvard – a prestigious Ivy League campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts – began in March, when Trump sought to impose new rules and regulations on top schools across the country that had played host to pro-Palestinian protests over the past year.

Trump has called such protests “illegal” and accused participants of anti-Semitism. But student protest leaders have described their actions as a peaceful response to Israel’s war in Gaza, which has elicited concerns about human rights abuses, including genocide.

The Trump administration announced the first funding freeze in April. Harvard had rejected the administration’s series of demands to tackle alleged anti-Semitism, saying they would subject it to undue government control. The demands had included revamping its disciplinary system, eliminating its diversity initiatives and agreeing to an external audit of programmes deemed anti-Semitic by the administration.

Trump and prominent conservatives in the US have also long accused Harvard and other universities of propagating extreme left-wing views and stifling right-wing perspectives.

Krakow, Poland – As Adrian Zandberg, leader of Poland’s left-wing Razem (Together) party, prepared to speak to the large crowd at his rally in one of Krakow’s central squares on Wednesday this week, he wasn’t just getting ready to contest Sunday’s presidential election.

Speaking with a revolutionary zeal to the cheering crowd, Zandberg put forward his ideals: Quality public services, affordable housing for all, investment in education and science and the end to a toxic right-wing duopoly in Polish politics.

Zandberg is one of two presidential hopefuls of Poland’s left – the other is Magdalena Biejat of the Lewica (The Left) party. Between the two of them, they represent a political force that has long remained on the margins of politics. Sunday’s contest is also a fight for the leadership of this movement which is popular with urban, generally younger people.

Opinion polls suggest that the final presidential battle – first-round voting takes place on Sunday – will be between the two favourites, Rafał Trzaskowski and Karol Nawrocki, representatives of right-wing parties Civic Platform and Law and Justice (PiS) which have dominated the country’s political scene for the past 20 years.

Nevertheless, Zandberg was confident and full of passion as he addressed his supporters.

“I believe that we can build a different, better Poland. I believe that we can afford for Poland to become a country with decent public services,” he declared. “That we can afford for people in the 20th economy in the world to stop dying in line to see a doctor. That we can afford for young, hard-working people to be able to rent a roof over their heads for a normal price, so that they can afford to start a family.”

Calling the current system “unconstitutional” and one which “explodes with inequalities”, he called for a change. The system, he said, “is a threat to the future of Poland”.

Like other left-wing politicians, he has been a staunch critic of the neoliberal views of the two main candidates, their lack of commitment to securing affordable housing for people (which is a constitutional right), attempts to privatise the healthcare system, and their seeming embrace of rising anti-migrant sentiment within the country.

Having a ‘real’ effect on Polish politics

The day before, in another square in central Krakow, Biejat, Zandberg’s main competitor for the hearts and minds of Poland’s left and deputy marshal of the Senate, stood before her own crowd of supporters. Unlike Zandberg’s Razem, her party, Lewica, is part of the ruling Civic Coalition along with the centre-right Civic Platform.

Lewica’s decision to enter the coalition government in late 2023 prompted criticism among some on the left, and has become the main bone of contention between the two leftist presidential candidates.

Speaking at her rally on Tuesday, Biejat defended the decision to join the coalition as the right one. According to her, it has allowed her party to have a real effect on politics in Poland.

She listed their achievements: “It is thanks to Lewica being in the government that we managed to introduce a pension supplement for widows. We managed to introduce a pilot programme which shortened working hours. We managed to increase the funeral allowance,” Biejat said.

“We have changed the definition of rape, so that women no longer have to explain to the judges that it was not their fault that someone had hurt them. Thanks to us, parents of premature babies have received additional leave days for each week spent in hospital with a small child.”

The Krakow crowd, albeit smaller than Zandberg’s, cheered Biejat’s declarations of support for the rights of women, LGBTQ people and those with disabilities and for affordable housing.

A fragile resurgence?

The two-term presidency of the left-wing Aleksander Kwasniewsk, an independent but also one of the founders of the Democratic Left Alliance, was highly successful. Under his presidency, which ended in 2005, Poland joined NATO and the European Union and introduced a new constitution. Since his departure, however, the left has been in crisis.

While the ideals of the left-wing candidates barely differ from those of left-wing candidates in other European countries, their appeal in Poland is limited these days as people have become disillusioned with immigration, and resentment towards the one million Ukrainian refugees taking shelter from the war with Russia has grown. According to Politico’s latest aggregate poll, the two leftist candidates are each expected to win 5 percent of the vote.

In the most recent European election in 2024, Lewica secured just 6.3 percent of the vote, the lowest score in its history. In the most recent parliamentary elections of 2023, the party secured just 5.3 percent of the vote. The question now is whether leftist parties can start to make a comeback.

Some observers see signs of a possible resurgence – but it is fragile.

“Any result above 5 percent for each of the candidates [in the upcoming presidential contest] would be a good score. And below 4 percent – a bad one,” said Bartosz Rydlinski, a political scientist at Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University in Warsaw.

He credits Zandberg with “restarting the Razem party project” by appealing to younger voters. “Recent studies show that he is competing with Slawomir Mentzen [the highly popular ultraconservative and free-market-enthusiast leader of the Confederation Party] to be number one among the youngest voters.

“Magdalena Biejat, on her part, represents women from the middle class, living in large cities. She is their mirror image. The election will show which one of them is more popular,” Rydlinski said.

Limited appeal

At the last presidential election five years ago, Robert Biedron of Lewica, who now serves as a Polish member of the European parliament (MEP), won just 2.2 percent of the vote. This time around, the left is expected to do better, but its appeal remains limited.

According to experts, the left has lost much of its traditional support base to the nationalist conservative Law and Justice (PiS) party, which attracted voters with generous welfare packages. In this presidential election, Karol Nawrocki, who is backed by PiS, is expected to take 25 percent of the vote in the first round, according to Politico’s aggregate poll.

This is despite the fact that Nawrocki has abandoned Law and Justice’s commitment to social welfare and has embraced free-market thinking with a focus on strengthening an alliance with the US while distancing Poland from the EU.

His main competitor,Rafał Trzaskowski of the centre-right Civic Platform, is polling at 31 percent.

“The left is continuously trying to win back pro-social Law and Justice voters, but so far it has failed,” Jakub Majmurek, a commentator at the left-wing Krytyka Polityczna media outlet, told Al Jazeera. “First of all, because these voters are often calculating and feel that the Law and Justice is a much more credible welfare provider than the weak left.

“Second, these voters are largely pro-church and much more conservative when it comes to social issues than the left.”

A good result for the left in the Sunday election could have the effect of bringing left-wing politics back to the agenda, analysts say, and make some inroads into reversing the long-term trend of far-right and centre-right politicians dominating government.

“If the combined result of Biejat and Zandberg is around 10 percent, in the second election round, Trzaskowski or even Nawrocki will have to try to claim this left-wing electorate somehow,” Majmurek explained.

“That would be the best scenario for the left. Especially if both candidates receive a similar percentage of the vote. That would show that none of them is a hegemon and cannot build the left without the other.”

NEW YORK — Christine Farro has cut back on the presents she sends her grandchildren on their birthdays, and she’s put off taking two cats and a dog for their shots. All her clothes come from thrift stores and most of her vegetables come from her garden. At 73, she has cut her costs as much as she can to live on a tight budget.

But it’s about to get far tighter.

As the Trump administration resumes collections on defaulted student loans, a surprising population has been caught in the crosshairs: hundreds of thousands of older Americans whose decades-old debts now put them at risk of having their Social Security checks garnished.

“I worked ridiculous hours. I worked weekends and nights. But I could never pay it off,” says Farro, a retired child welfare worker in Santa Ynez, Calif.

Like millions of debtors with federal student loans, Farro had her payments and interest paused by the government five years ago when the pandemic thrust many into financial hardship. That grace period ended in 2023 and, earlier this month, the Department of Education said it would restart “involuntary collections” by garnishing paychecks, tax refunds and Social Security retirement and disability benefits. Farro previously had her Social Security garnished and expects it to restart.

Farro’s loans date back 40 years. She was a single mother when she got a bachelor’s degree in developmental psychology and when she discovered she couldn’t earn enough to pay off her loans, she went back to school and got a master’s degree. Her salary never caught up. Things only got worse.

Around 2008, when she consolidated her loans, she was paying $1,000 a month, but years of missed payments and piled-on interest meant she was barely putting a dent in a bill that had ballooned to $250,000. When she sought help to resolve her debt, she says the loan company had just one suggestion.

“They said, ‘Move to a cheaper state,’” says Farro, who rents a 400-square-foot casita from a friend. “I realized I was living in a different reality than they were.”

Student loan debt among older people has grown at a staggering rate, in part due to rising tuitions that have forced more people to borrow greater sums. People 60 and older hold an estimated $125 billion in student loans, according to the National Consumer Law Center, a six-fold increase from 20 years ago.

That has led Social Security beneficiaries who have had their payments garnished to balloon by 3,000% — from approximately 6,200 beneficiaries to 192,300 — between 2001 and 2019, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

This year, an estimated 452,000 people aged 62 and older had student loans in default and are likely to experience the Department of Education’s renewed forced collections, according to the January report from CFPB.

Debbie McIntyre, a 62-year-old adult education teacher in Georgetown, Ky., is among them. She dreams of retiring and writing more historical fiction, and of boarding a plane for the first time since high school. But her husband has been out of work on disability for two decades and they’ve used credit cards to get by on his meager benefits and her paycheck. Their rent will be hiked $300 when their lease renews. McIntyre doesn’t know what to do if her paycheck is garnished.

She floats the idea of bankruptcy, but that won’t automatically clear her loans, which are held to a different standard than other debt. She figures if she picks up extra jobs babysitting or tutoring, she could put $50 toward her loans here and there. But she sees no real solution.

“I don’t know what more I can do,” says McIntyre, who is too afraid to check what her loan balance is. “I’ll never get out of this hole.”

Braxton Brewington of the Debt Collective debtors union says it’s striking how many older people dial into the organization’s calls and attend its protests. Many of them, he says, should have had their debts canceled but fell victim to a system “riddled with flaws and illegalities and flukes.” Many whose educations have left them in late-life debt have, in fact, paid back the principal on their loans, sometimes several times over, but still owe more due to interest and fees.

For those who are subject to garnishment, Brewington says, the results can be devastating.

“We hear from people who skip meals. We know people who dilute their medication or cut their pills in half. People take drastic measures like pulling all their savings out or dissolving their 401ks,” he says. “We know folks that have been driven into homelessness.”

Collections on defaulted loans may have restarted no matter who was president, though the Biden administration had sought to limit the amount of income that could be garnished. Federal law protects just $750 of Social Security benefits from garnishment, an amount that would put a debtor far below the poverty line.

“We’re basically providing people with federal benefits with one hand and taking them away with another,” says Sarah Sattelmeyer of the New America think tank.

Linda Hilton, a 76-year-old retired office worker from Apache Junction, Ariz., went through garnishment before COVID and says she will survive it again. But flights to see her children, occasional meals at a restaurant and other pleasures of retired life may disappear.

“It’s going to mean restrictions,” says Hilton. “There won’t be any travel. There won’t be any frills.”

Some debtors have already received notice about collections. Many more are living in fear. President Trump has signed an executive order calling for the Department of Education’s dismantling and, for those seeking answers about their loans, mass layoffs have complicated getting calls answered.

While Education Secretary Linda McMahon says restarting collections is a necessary step for debtors “both for the sake of their own financial health and our nation’s economic outlook,” even some of Trump’s most fervent supporters are questioning a move that will make their lives harder.

Randall Countryman, 55, of Bonita, Calif., says a Biden administration proposal to forgive some student debt didn’t strike him as fair, but he’s not sure Trump’s approach is either. He supported Trump but wishes the government made case-by-case decisions on debtors. Countryman thinks Americans don’t realize how many older people are affected by policies on student loans, often thought to be the turf of the young, and how difficult it can be for them to repay.

“What’s a young person’s problem today,” he says, “is an old person’s problem tomorrow.”

Countryman started working on a degree while in prison, then continued it at the University of Phoenix when he was released. He started growing nervous as he racked up loan debt and never finished his degree. He’s worked a host of different jobs, but finding work has often been complicated by his criminal record.

He lives off his wife’s Social Security check and the kindness of his mother-in-law. He doesn’t know how they’d get by if the government demands repayment.

“I kind of wish I never went to school in the first place,” he says.

Sedensky writes for the Associated Press.

Eurovision country trio Remember Monday’s are not new to the stage, as they actually competed in The Voice back in 2019

As the UK’s Eurovision 2025 hopefuls gear up for their big moment on the Grand Final stage, fans are learning more about Remember Monday and their surprising showbiz roots. The country trio is comprised of Lauren Byrne, Holly-Anne Hull and Charlotte Steele.

The three women have known each other since their teenage years, when they became friends while studying at The Sixth Form College Farnborough in Hampshire. The trio originally performed under the name Houston, but rebranded as Remember Monday in 2018 as a tribute to the day they all had free periods at college and would spend time singing together.

Long before preparing to take to the stage for Eurovision, all three members had already become acquainted with the world of entertainment. Charlotte was just a child when she played Jane Bank in Mary Poppins on the West End stage.

Meanwhile, Lauren took on the role of Miss Honey in Matilda, and Holly performed in both Les Misérables and The Phantom of the Opera.

Their big break came in 2019 when the trio auditioned for The Voice UK, stunning judges with their powerful harmonies on Seal’s Kiss from a Rose.

All four coaches turned their chairs, but the band ultimately chose to join Team Jennifer Hudson after being swayed by the chance to be mentored by the only female judge on the panel.

The trio went on to win their Battle Round but were knocked out during the Knockout stage after performing their original track Jailbreaker. Despite the early exit from the competition, the group went on to build a loyal fanbase in the UK.

In September 2023 they took a leap of faith and quit their day jobs to pursue music full time. In early 2024 they were reunited with Hudson on her US talk show, where they gave a soulful performance of Hand in My Pocket by Alanis Morissette.

That same year, Remember Monday was announced as the UK’s Eurovision act for 2025, becoming the first girl band to represent the nation in 26 years.

Their entry What The Hell Just Happened? is a track with bold 80s influences inspired by the chaos of a wild night out. BBC Radio commentators admitted to being “nervous” before they heard the band perform, but were quickly “blown away” after watching Remember Monday’s rehearsals.

Richie Anderson shared: “I was a little bit nervous. It’s like when a family member is about to do a school assembly performance – you’re excited, but also so protective. But as soon as they started singing, their vocals were just incredible.”

He went on to say that the girls’ background in musical theatre prepared them well for putting on a show of this magnitude. He added: “They hit every camera, so it feels like they’re performing just for you – it’s very intimate.”

The Eurovision Song Contest continues with the second semi-final on Thursday, May 15 at 8pm on BBC One and BBC iPlayer. The Grand Final will take place on Saturday, May 17 at 8pm on BBC One and BBC iPlayer.

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

For almost 30 years, the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 has been a forgotten headline. Now, the BBC are shining a light on the tragedy – leaving Connor Swindells lost for words.

December 21, 1988. A routine transatlantic flight from Heathrow to JFK ends in catastrophe. Pan Am Flight 103 explodes mid-air over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 259 people on board and 11 on the ground.

It was the deadliest terrorist attack on US citizens before 9/11, yet for many – including some of the cast of BBC One’s gripping new series The Bombing Of Pan Am 103 – the tragedy has become a forgotten headline.

“I didn’t know much about it before,” says Sex Education actor Connor Swindells, 28, who plays a Scottish detective. “The filming process was really informative.”

His co-star, Suits’ Patrick J Adams, 43, says, “I was seven years old when it happened and living in the UK at the time. As soon as I heard a series was being made about the events, I thought, ‘How has this never happened before?’”

In the six-part series, also coming to Netflix, Connor and Patrick play opposing forces in the aftermath of the bombing. Connor steps into the role of DS Ed McCusker, the detective leading the case on home soil.

Patrick portrays his American counterpart and rival, FBI special agent Dick Marquise. As Scotland and the US wrangle for control of the investigation in a bid to seek answers, political friction and personal grief collide.

READ MORE: Shopper ‘couldn’t go a day without a spot’ before using dermatologist-approved serum

The series doesn’t shy away from the geopolitical tensions that followed the bombing. While the FBI got involved assuming there would be cooperation, they were met with resistance from the Scottish authorities.

“I thought the FBI would be welcomed to any investigation,” says Patrick. “But this happened on Scottish soil – it belonged to them. There was friction despite everyone wanting the same thing.”

That complexity was front and centre for Connor, who found the emotional weight of his role intense. “This is a story that must be handled with care,” he says. “It’s been a real lesson in trying to do justice to the truth every single day, which is how it should be.”

Joining Patrick and Connor are Merritt Wever as FBI victim services director Kathryn Turman and Eddie Marsan as explosives expert Tom Thurman. Like Connor, Merritt knew little about the tragedy before filming.

“It wasn’t on my radar,” she says. “But once I started speaking to people, so many had connections.” Eddie, however, remembers it vividly. “It was a terrible moment in history,” he says.

Kathryn went on to reshape the FBI from the inside out once the investigation was closed. “She saw that, back in 1988, these big investigative institutions lacked a framework for putting families first in the wake of these disasters.

She helped transform the Department of Justice and FBI, essentially giving them a heart,” says Merritt. Writer Jonathan Lee hopes the series does justice to the enormity of the event – and its continued relevance.

“It was the biggest crime scene the world had ever seen at the time,” he says. “They had to piece together the communication lines across borders, beliefs and individual agendas. It’s a lesson we’re constantly learning and unlearning.”

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

In an era where technological paradigms shift with geopolitical winds, where design thinking must account for cultural diplomacy, and where engineering solutions intersect with national security concerns, India faces an epistemic crisis in higher education. The disciplinary silos that have long characterized our academic institutions—compartmentalizing knowledge into business, technology, design, and social sciences—have become intellectual anachronisms. This essay argues not merely for incremental curriculum reform but for a fundamental reconceptualization of knowledge production and transmission across disciplines, with particular emphasis on geopolitical literacy as an intellectual cornerstone for students of all academic backgrounds.

The Epistemological Divide: Empirical Evidence

The data regarding interdisciplinary education in India reveals a stark reality that demands urgent intellectual attention:

• Among India’s premier technological institutions, only 4.3% offer substantive coursework in international relations or geopolitical analysis (IIT Council Report, 2024).
• Within design schools, a mere 2.7% incorporate geopolitical considerations into their curriculum despite the growing importance of cultural diplomacy in global aesthetics (Design Education Review, 2023).
• Computer science programs show particular deficiency, with 91% offering no coursework on the geopolitics of technology, despite India’s positioning in the global digital economy (National Association of Software Companies, 2024).
• Engineering students receive, on average, less than 3.5 credit hours of humanities education throughout their entire degree program (All India Council for Technical Education, 2024).

When juxtaposed against global benchmarks—where leading institutions mandate cross-disciplinary exposure—this disciplinary isolation represents not merely a pedagogical oversight but an intellectual impoverishment with profound implications for India’s future.

The segregation of knowledge into discrete disciplines reflects a Cartesian reductionism increasingly at odds with contemporary epistemology. The complex problems facing modern societies—from climate adaptation to artificial intelligence governance—exist in what philosopher Horst Rittel termed the realm of “wicked problems,” resistant to solutions derived from any single knowledge domain.

Consider these intellectual frameworks that demand cross-disciplinary integration:

1. Systems Theory Perspective: Complex adaptive systems that characterize global affairs cannot be understood through linear causal models typical of siloed education. As philosopher Edgar Morin argues, understanding complexity requires transcending disciplinary boundaries.
2. Epistemic Justice: The privileging of certain knowledge forms (technical, financial) over others (geopolitical, cultural) represents what philosopher Miranda Fricker identifies as “hermeneutical injustice”—denying students conceptual resources needed to interpret their reality.
3. Constructivist Learning Theory: Knowledge constructed through interdisciplinary engagement leads to cognitive frameworks better suited to navigating complexity, as educational theorist Jean Piaget established.
4. Critical Realism Philosophy: The stratified nature of reality (physical, biological, social, geopolitical) means that reduction to any single analytical level produces incomplete understanding—a perspective advanced by philosopher Roy Bhaskar.

NEP 2020: Potential and Contradictions

India’s National Education Policy 2020 ostensibly embraces interdisciplinary education, calling for “holistic and multidisciplinary education” as a foundational principle. Yet a critical analysis reveals significant contradictions between rhetoric and implementation mechanisms:

The policy states, “There will be no hard separations between arts and sciences, between curricular and extracurricular activities, or between vocational and academic streams.”

However, structural implementations reveal persistent disciplinary segregation:

• Credit allocation systems still predominantly favor disciplinary depth over breadth.
• Faculty evaluation metrics continue to reward specialization over integration.
• Administrative structures maintain departmental silos instead of problem-focused organization.
• Funding mechanisms disproportionately support traditional disciplinary research.

What emerges is a form of what sociologist Pierre Bourdieu would term “symbolic violence”—the appearance of change while reproducing existing knowledge hierarchies. True interdisciplinary education requires not merely allowing elective courses but fundamentally restructuring the epistemological foundations of higher education.

Geopolitics as Foundational Knowledge

The argument for geopolitical literacy extends beyond traditional international relations frameworks. Geopolitics offers essential intellectual scaffolding for understanding the context in which all disciplines operate:

For Design Students

Design does not occur in a geopolitical vacuum. Consider:

• The emergence of “strategic design” as a field addressing complex social problems requires understanding of geopolitical forces.
• Cultural diplomacy increasingly employs design as soft power—87% of nations have invested in design-forward cultural initiatives (UNESCO Cultural Indicators Report, 2023).
• Supply chain aesthetics are shaped by geopolitical realities—the movement of materials, labor, and production reflects power dynamics that designers must navigate.
• Design futures work must account for geopolitical scenarios—42% of failed design innovations demonstrated ignorance of geopolitical constraints (Design Management Institute, 2024).

For Technology Students

The bifurcation of global technology ecosystems along geopolitical lines demands attention:

• Semiconductor supply chains have become explicitly geopolitical, with India’s positioning requiring strategic understanding—the $10 billion India Semiconductor Mission operates in a geopolitical context students must comprehend.
• Data sovereignty regulations reflect geopolitical tensions—76% of new technology regulations in India’s key export markets derive from geopolitical considerations (MEITY Analysis, 2023).
• AI ethics frameworks diverge along geopolitical lines, with 63% of major differences attributable to geopolitical positioning rather than technical considerations (AI Ethics Global Review, 2024).
• Technology standards-setting processes have become battlegrounds for national influence—participation requires diplomatic as well as technical expertise.

For Other Non-Social Science Fields

• Agriculture students: 71% of agricultural market disruptions in the past decade stemmed from geopolitical events rather than climate or technology factors.
• Medical students: Global health security increasingly operates as a function of geopolitical relationships—pandemic response coordination shows an 84% correlation with geopolitical alliance structures.
• Architecture students: Urban resilience planning now incorporates geopolitical risk assessment in 67% of major global architectural firms.

Reimagining Interdisciplinary Education

Meaningful interdisciplinary education must transcend the tokenism of isolated courses to embrace what philosopher Hannah Arendt termed “praxis”—reflective action informed by theoretical understanding. This requires

Structural Reforms

1. Epistemic Integration: Core courses should integrate knowledge across disciplines rather than merely adding electives—for example, “Geopolitics of Design” rather than “Design” plus “Geopolitics.”
2. Faculty Development: Create joint appointments across departments and invest in faculty capacity to teach across disciplinary boundaries.
3. Assessment Revolution: Move beyond discipline-specific metrics to evaluate students’ ability to synthesize knowledge across domains.
4. Institutional Architecture: Reorganize academic units around problems rather than disciplines—establishing centers for “Technology Governance” rather than separate computer science and political science departments.

Pedagogical Innovations

1. Wicked Problem Studios: Project-based learning focused on complex challenges requiring multiple knowledge domains
2. Simulation-Based Learning: Complex geopolitical simulations where students from different disciplines must collaborate to address scenarios
3. Embedded Fieldwork: Place students in contexts where disciplinary knowledge must be applied within geopolitical complexities.
4. Collaborative Research: Structure research initiatives requiring teams spanning disciplines.

The resistance to interdisciplinary education reflects not merely administrative convenience but deeper intellectual commitments to particular forms of knowledge production. As sociologist Thomas Kuhn demonstrated, paradigm shifts in knowledge structures face resistance from established practitioners. This resistance takes several forms:

1. Epistemic Hierarchy: The implicit ranking of knowledge types that privileges technical over contextual understanding
2. Disciplinary Identity: Faculty self-conception rooted in disciplinary expertise rather than problem-solving capacity
3. Measurement Fetishism: Overreliance on discipline-specific metrics that cannot capture interdisciplinary competence
4. Resource Competition: Zero-sum thinking about curriculum space and faculty resources

Beyond Employability

While much discourse around education reform focuses on employability, the argument for interdisciplinary geopolitical education runs deeper. At stake is what philosopher Martha Nussbaum identifies as the “capability for critical thinking”—the intellectual capacity to comprehend and engage with complex realities.

The segregation of knowledge domains impoverishes not merely professional competence but civic capacity. In a democracy increasingly facing complex, interconnected challenges, citizens require integrated understanding. This represents what political philosopher Michael Sandel terms “civic education”—preparation not merely for economic contribution but for meaningful participation in collective self-governance.

Empirical Evidence of Interdisciplinary Impact

The case for interdisciplinary education is not merely philosophical but empirically grounded:

• Teams comprising members with diverse disciplinary backgrounds demonstrate 43% higher problem-solving efficacy for complex challenges (Harvard Interdisciplinary Research Initiative, 2023).
• Organizations led by individuals with interdisciplinary education show 37% greater adaptive capacity during geopolitical disruptions (McKinsey Global Institute, 2024).
• Patents filed by teams with interdisciplinary composition show 28% higher citation impact and 41% greater commercial application (World Intellectual Property Organization, 2024).
• National innovation systems with higher rates of interdisciplinary collaboration demonstrate 23% faster response to complex crises (OECD Innovation Policy Review, 2023).

Beyond NEP 2020: A Radical Reimagining

While NEP 2020 provides rhetorical support for interdisciplinary education, implementation requires more fundamental reconceptualization. True interdisciplinary education demands:

1. Philosophical Reconciliation: Acknowledging that the fragmentation of knowledge is itself a historical construct rather than an epistemological necessity
2. Structural Transformation: Moving beyond departmental structures to problem-focused organization
3. Pedagogical Revolution: Replacing linear curriculum models with networked knowledge structures
4. Assessment Reconception: Developing evaluation frameworks that value synthesis and integration
5. Faculty Transformation: Recruiting and developing scholars capable of transcending disciplinary boundaries

The Intellectual Imperative

The argument for interdisciplinary geopolitical education transcends instrumental concerns about career preparation. What is at stake is nothing less than our capacity to comprehend and address the defining challenges of our era.

For India’s position in the global knowledge economy—and more fundamentally, for its democratic vitality—the integration of geopolitical understanding across disciplines represents not a curricular luxury but an intellectual necessity. The continued segregation of knowledge domains reflects not merely administrative convenience but an impoverished conception of education itself.

As philosopher John Dewey argued, education must prepare students not merely for the world as it exists but for creating the world that could be. In an era of profound geopolitical transformation, this preparation requires not the reinforcement of intellectual silos but their transcendence. The question is not whether design students, technology students, and others should be “allowed” to learn international relations—it is whether we can afford the intellectual impoverishment that results from preventing them from doing so.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has slashed another $450m in grants from Harvard University, amid an ongoing feud over anti-Semitism, presidential control and the limits of academic freedom.

On Tuesday, a joint task force assembled under Trump accused Harvard, the country’s oldest university, of perpetrating a “long-standing policy and practice of discriminating on the basis of race”.

“Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination. This is not leadership; it is cowardice. And it’s not academic freedom; it’s institutional disenfranchisement,” the task force said in a statement.

“By prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support.”

The elimination of another $450m in grants came in addition to the more than $2.2bn in federal funds that were already suspended last week, the task force added.

The feud between the president and Harvard – a prestigious Ivy League campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts – began in March, when Trump sought to impose new rules and regulations on top schools that had played host to pro-Palestinian protests over the last year.

Trump has called such protests “illegal” and accused participants of anti-Semitism. But student protest leaders have described their actions as a peaceful response to Israel’s war in Gaza, which has elicited concerns about human rights abuses, including genocide.

Columbia University was initially a centrepiece of the Trump administration’s efforts. The New York City school had seen the first major Palestine solidarity encampment rise on its lawn, which served as a blueprint for similar protests around the world. It also saw a series of mass arrests in the aftermath.

In March, one of Columbia’s protest leaders, Mahmoud Khalil, was the first foreign student to be arrested and have his legal immigration status revoked under Trump’s campaign to punish demonstrators. And when Trump threatened to yank $400m in grants and research contracts, the school agreed to submit to a list of demands to restore the funding.

The demands included adopting a formal definition of anti-Semitism, beefing up campus security and putting one of its academic departments – focused on Middle East, African and South Asian studies – under the supervision of an outside authority.

Free speech advocates called Columbia’s concessions a capitulation to Trump, who they say has sought to erode academic freedom and silence viewpoints he disagrees with.

On April 11, his administration issued another list of demands for Harvard that went even further. Under its terms, Harvard would have had to revamp its disciplinary system, eliminate its diversity initiatives and agree to an external audit of programmes deemed anti-Semitic.

The demands also required Harvard to agree to “structural and personnel changes” that would foster “viewpoint diversity” – a term left ambiguous. But critics argued it was a means for Trump to impose his values and priorities on the school by shaping its hiring and admissions practices.

Harvard has been at the centre of controversies surrounding its admissions in the past. In 2023, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that Harvard’s consideration of race in student admissions – through a process called affirmative action – violated the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution.

Tuesday’s letter referenced that court decision in arguing that “Harvard University has repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and anti-Semitic harassment plaguing its campus”.

A pair of reports in April, created by Harvard University’s own task forces, also found that there were cases of anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish violence on campus in the wake of Israel’s war in Gaza, a divisive issue in US politics.

Ultimately, on April 14, Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, rejected the Trump administration’s demands, arguing they were evidence of government overreach.

“No government – regardless of which party is in power – should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” Garber wrote in his response.

But Trump has continued to pressure the campus, including by threatening to revoke its tax-exempt status. Democrats and other critics have warned that it would be illegal for the president to influence the decisions of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with regard to individual taxpayers, like the university.

Under Trump, the Department of Homeland Security has also threatened to bar foreign students from enrolling at the university if Harvard did not hand over documents pertaining to the pro-Palestine protests.

On Monday, Garber, Harvard’s president, wrote a response to Trump’s secretary of education, Linda McMahon, defending his campus’s commitment to free speech while also addressing the spectre of anti-Semitism.

“We share common ground on a number of critical issues, including the importance of ending antisemitism and other bigotry on campus. Like you, I believe that Harvard must foster an academic environment that encourages freedom of thought and expression, and that we should embrace a multiplicity of viewpoints,” his letter read.

But, he added, Harvard’s efforts to create a more equitable learning environment were “undermined and threatened” by the Trump administration’s “overreach”.

“Harvard will not surrender its core, legally-protected principles out of fear of unfounded retaliation by the federal government,” Garber said.

“I must refute your claim that Harvard is a partisan institution. It is neither Republican nor Democratic. It is not an arm of any other political party or movement. Nor will it ever be.”

She was just seven years old when they were displaced by the Boko Haram insurgency in Borno State, northeastern Nigeria. Elizabeth Bitrus and her family fled to Taraba State, where they lived in an internally displaced persons (IDP) Camp. That was the first time Elizabeth had to adjust to a home that was not her home. 

Three years later, she and her aunt boarded a bus bound for Edo State, South South Nigeria, where her aunt resides. 

No one told Elizabeth Bitrus exactly where she was headed, but she knew it meant a fresh start, a chance to return to school, and she could hardly contain her excitement. She had dropped out after displacement upended her life. Elizabeth was only ten. Her aunt had told her stories of what it was like living there and how children attend a free school, with provisions for food, books, and even toiletries. 

They eventually arrived at Uhogua, a rural community in Edo State. Their destination was the Home for the Needy Camp, a sprawling compound dotted with blocks of buildings roofed with rusted zinc sheets. When they arrived, her aunt dropped her off at the camp and said she was leaving. Her house was a few minutes away, but students lived in a boarding school arrangement.

Founded in 1992 by Solomon Folorunsho, a Nigerian pastor, the camp provides free accommodation, feeding, and education for displaced people. It currently houses over 4000 people. 

“I thought I would be living with my aunt while attending the school,” Elizabeth recalls with a chuckle. “I started crying profusely. I immediately started to miss my mum and told my aunt to take me back home.”

The memory is still fresh in her mind. She can laugh about it now in hindsight, but at the time, it was terrifying. She didn’t know anyone. How would she fit in?

“I didn’t find it very hard to fit in, thankfully. There was a group of girls who were eager to make friends with me, the new girl. When I kept crying, saying I wanted to leave, they advised me to be patient and stay to study,” Elizabeth said. 

Slowly, she grew accustomed to the routine of the camp. 

“Soon enough, I started to enjoy being in the camp, so much that I didn’t even care about going back home anymore,” she recounted. 

‘Home for the needy’

Over three decades ago, Solomon started caring for children in Edo who were abandoned by their parents and those out of school. 

“I rented an apartment and put them in a private school. These children became wonderful. I saw how they were competing [with other students], which encouraged me. That is how I started,” he said.  

The capacity grew from a one-bedroom apartment to a three-bedroom apartment, then a seven-bedroom apartment. But with more children came greater responsibilities and shrinking resources. Solomon could not manage alone anymore. He began seeking donations from individuals and organisations, and when the children’s school fees became exorbitant, he started a school, employed teachers and got volunteers to run it. 

When the Boko Haram insurgency began, “friends from the north were calling me. This was around 2012. I thought about what we could do for the children, and gradually some families started coming here,” Solomon tells HumAngle. Elizabeth was one of them. 

They live in large tents, each housing up to 50 students. They sleep on mats and attend prayers every morning, before heading to classes in modern brick-walled classrooms. Oddly, however, only the teenage girls were required to cook. They did so in groups, taking turns according to a schedule. Then they shared the food with everyone, both the girls and the boys. 

After dinner, they’d form study groups. Some would do their assignments, others would study for tests. If one didn’t have a torch to read with, they’d go under the tall solar-powered streetlights in the camp’s compound. 

The longing for home

Elizabeth often thought about her mom and three siblings in the early days. 

She never once spoke to her mother for seven years at the camp. She discovered that she had cousins in the camp, and one day, as they chatted with their mom over the phone, Elizabeth heard her mother’s voice. She spoke with her briefly, and a sudden longing for home started to sweep over her. 

“I missed them so much. I knew I needed to go back and see my family,” she recounts.

It had taken a long time to properly reestablish contact with her mom after that brief call on her aunt’s phone in 2021. Her mom didn’t have a phone, so they didn’t speak again until three years later, in 2024. 

Living conditions in the camp were deteriorating: there was hunger, the toilets were full, and some were breaking down. More and more, Elizabeth craved her mother’s embrace. Over the call, she told her mother she wanted to return home, and her mother sent money for transport.

She was excited and nervous the day she was finally leaving Edo for Abuja, North-central Nigeria. It had been nearly a decade since she’d left her family in Taraba, and so much had changed. She is now 18 years old. Her family moved. She wondered how much taller her siblings had grown, whether her mother had aged at all.

“When I saw her waiting for me at the car park after we arrived, I ran into her arms and started sobbing, and sobbing. I couldn’t control it,” Elizabeth recounts with a smile. 

When HumAngle met her at Kuchingoro IDP Camp, an informal settlement in Abuja, where she lives with her mum, Elizabeth was sitting under the shade of a tree. She had just returned from work as a domestic help in a house close to the camp. Across the street, the grand terrace buildings of the estate where Elizabeth sweeps and mops floors stand in sharp contrast to her lowly tent, made out of rusted zinc roof sheets and rags. 

Since she came here, she has not enrolled in school because her mother cannot afford it, and her father is absent. The last time Elizabeth saw him was when they were in Taraba in 2015. He had visited briefly, then left for Lagos. No one has heard from him since.

Elizabeth’s mom, Abigail Bitrus, told HumAngle that her husband had always worked in Lagos and only visited occasionally, even when they lived in Borno. But he has not been in contact with the family since his last visit a decade ago.

“Some of his relatives say he’s alive and well, others say they haven’t heard from him in years. But he and I didn’t fight or anything, and I just wish he’d at least call us,” Abigail explained, tears welling up in her eyes. 

Abigail is 38 years old. She moved to Abuja near her parents, who live in Nasarawa, a neighbouring state. She has lived in the camp for four years, but now faces the threat of eviction. After settling on privately owned property, she and many others were uprooted from their tents, forced to move to a smaller space on another piece of private land. 

Of hope and struggles

Elizabeth wishes to go back to the camp in Benin City. Although it is not her ideal place to live, she gets to study at least. Education is crucial to her, and she has lofty dreams, but is not allowed to return to the camp. 

“I’m now in SS2. I want to graduate and go to university to study medicine. I want to graduate as the best student and get a scholarship to study abroad, like one of my seniors, who is now in the United States,” Elizabeth said. 

Solomon told HumAngle that over 300 students have proceeded to university after graduating from the camp. They studied courses ranging from engineering to medicine and nursing. One student emerged as the best graduating student in his class at Edo State University and later secured a scholarship to the University of Illinois, Chicago.

He said the decision to stop students like Elizabeth from returning to the camp after leaving depends on each family’s situation and financial need.

“​​If you have a home and can afford transport to Abuja or Maiduguri, then you can stay at home, because we want to help those in need… if your father or mother has a house, at least let us give that chance to someone else,” Solomon explains.

Solomon tells HumAngle that donations and aid were consistent in the early days. However, that is no longer the case. Solomon has been appealing to individuals, organisations, and the government to bring more support, but the response has been slow. Globally, humanitarian aid has shrunk. 

The cost of paying teachers became unsustainable, forcing the employed staff to leave. The camp now relies on volunteers and former students to keep the school running. Even feeding the children has become a struggle.

“Food is at a critical level right now,” he says. “We’re struggling to feed the children just once a day. Some of those in university aren’t allowed to write exams because they haven’t paid the fees. We really need support at this time.”

Solomon says he usually pays to harvest from farms in neighbouring villages when food runs out. But it is not nearly enough to meet nutritional needs or satisfy the children. 

Displacement doesn’t just uproot homes—it disrupts education. Over 4.6 million children have been affected by the conflict in northeast Nigeria, according to UNICEF, and 56 per cent of displaced children in Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe are still out of school. Initiatives like Home for the Needy attempt to fill that gap, but without sustained support, many children like Elizabeth risk being left behind.

They are left waiting, left in search of home, education, and the hope for a better future.

Elizabeth still dreams of becoming a doctor. She believes her story doesn’t end in her mother’s arms in Abuja, nor does it find resolution in the dusty tents of Edo. She is a brilliant dreamer and believes in the possibility of more.