Connect with us

Utah

University of Utah spends $6M on controversial consulting firm it hopes will help save money

Published

on

University of Utah spends M on controversial consulting firm it hopes will help save money


The University of Utah is paying an outside firm $6 million for its advisers to come in and coach the school on how it could, in turn, save millions of dollars.

The flagship institution is the latest in the country to follow the consulting trend that promises to conserve universities money if they spend big bucks upfront in order to learn how to operate more efficiently. For its turn, the U. has contracted with the massive and controversial McKinsey & Company.

The project has been named “Operational Excellence.” And the U. says the point is to streamline processes and reduce wasteful redundancies across campus. Once fixed, the school can refocus efforts and, more importantly, resources on achieving the institution’s long-term goals, including graduating more students.

“The whole idea is to help us become the best version of ourselves,” said Brett Graham, chief strategy officer at the U., who is overseeing the work.

Advertisement

But the expensive endeavor comes as Utah lawmakers have turned a watchful eye to extravagant administrative spending in public higher education and are bandying about budget cuts for colleges and universities in the state. Most departments have been told to prepare for at least a 10% cut — some higher. Meanwhile, any significant savings from the consulting won’t be realized for years to come.

The choice of McKinsey has also ignited concern among faculty and staff.

The firm is a global enterprise, with a presence in 65 countries and more than 45,000 employees that has built a reputation off of coming into troubled organizations and cutting costs, often times through layoffs. In a book about the company, one journalist who has long covered the firm said McKinsey may be “the single greatest legitimizer of mass layoffs than anyone, anywhere, at any time in modern history.”

(Christopher Cherrington | The Salt Lake Tribune)

Graham told The Salt Lake Tribune that staff reductions were not being considered as part of the “Operational Excellence” effort. But a notice sent to employees a few days after The Tribune’s interview with Graham left some questioning that. It stated layoffs were “not our objective currently.”

Advertisement

The consulting firm has also often been scrutinized for its secrecy and ignoring conflicts of interests. Most notably, the company was used by Purdue Pharma to help market and drive sales of the opioid Oxycontin during an addiction crisis in the U.S. that contributed to 450,000 deaths. At the same time, McKinsey was also advising the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which is responsible for ensuring the safety of pharmaceutical drugs prescribed to the public, on a new and more lenient opioid regulation policy.

At the end of 2024, McKinsey agreed to pay out a $650 million settlement for its role in exacerbating the epidemic.

The company was also chastised by former U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio for working with Russian weapons makers and the Pentagon at the same time. “With every new report of McKinsey & Company’s work with authoritarian regimes, I grow increasingly concerned about its work on behalf of the U.S. Government,” Rubio wrote in a letter to the firm, also mentioning the firm’s contracts with China and Saudi Arabia.

When asked whether the consulting group’s past work gave the university pause, Graham said: “McKinsey is large. We really selected a specific practice area within McKinsey that would not have been involved there.”

In recent years, McKinsey has branched out from advising businesses and corporations into contracting with universities. The U. says similar plans for efficiency at other institutions have informed the work being done here.

Advertisement

That includes a $4.7 million contract with the University of Florida in 2023 — part of a spending spree reported by student journalists there that led then-President Ben Sasse to resign — and $14 million paid out by the University of Arizona in 2019. Other schools have gone with the firm Huron Consulting Group; the Universities of Wisconsin system paid consultants there $51 million over several years for a strategic plan, according to WORT Radio in Madison.

In each of those states, faculty have sounded alarm bells over the private companies’ influence on public education that continues to expand largely unchecked. McKinsey, in particular, has been shielded from having to disclose records of its work, all while being given unfettered access to huge amounts of data from schools.

Faculty have said the contracts can bring more harm than help.

The University of Utah’s vision

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Taylor Randall speaks about higher education and the Legislature at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City on Thursday, Jan. 16, 2025.

Bringing in consultants had been a murmur at the U. during its previous administration. It was shouted into action when current President Taylor Randall, who had been leading the business school before, took over.

Advertisement

He came in with a more corporate and analytical approach than his predecessors, focused on metrics-driven success. At his inauguration in fall 2021, Randall said he wanted to transform the university into an institution with “unsurpassed societal impact.” Out of that came “Impact 2030,” a series of lofty goals he intends the U. to meet over the next decade.

They include:

•Getting undergraduate student enrollment up to 40,000; it’s currently at 35,000.

•Improving graduation rates to 80% of students finishing their degrees within six years; the rate now is 64%.

•Growing annual research funding to $1 billion; it was $691 million for fiscal 2024.

Advertisement

•And becoming both a top 10 public research institution and top 10 school, overall; at the moment, it’s ranked No. 43 and No. 69, respectively.

To hit those marks, Randall said, it would require a deep understanding of how the school was already operating and how it could be operating better.

“To ensure we are positioned to meet our goals,” the president explained in one email on the process, it’s essential to “engage a strategic consultant who can provide outside expertise and a holistic assessment of our key processes, services and resource allocation.”

He had spoken to the school’s board of trustees about the idea several times. And by March 2023, his administration posted a request for proposals, or RFP, for companies to submit bids explaining how they would problem-solve and instruct the school on improvements.

That public RFP document provides the best glimpse into what the U. hopes to get out of the consulting.

Advertisement

It mentions the words “efficiency” and “efficiencies” eight times in its 32 pages. And it refers to saving money through those efforts 18 times.

“Prospective students, policy makers and prudent fiscal managers are increasingly examining the value proposition of higher education,” it reads.

Because of that, the document says, the U. aims to find “opportunities to avoid costs as we scale, or reduce costs and identify cost savings that result in additional expendable revenue.” The university particularly wants to avoid costs on “services that don’t support university strategic goals.”

The goal is to save $100 million over the next 10 years. The first $30 million would take five to six years, said U. Chief Financial Officer Cathy Anderson during one trustees meeting in December 2022.

The RFP directed any bidding consultant firms to build off of the work the school had already done to study its processes, while bringing in a broader perspective, software tools and additional capacity to question nearly every aspect of campus. (Only the health system falls outside of the scope, as it’s been separately conducting its own analysis.)

Advertisement

The document suggests specifically looking at how the U. recruits and admits students, how it supports them throughout their studies, how many aren’t graduating and what hurdles have stopped them. It calls for an examination, too, into how teaching is delivered and how research functions. On-campus housing, student support services (like counseling and advising) and operations of the Campus Store are also on the table.

Administration makes the list, as well, including “where operating in silos results in sub-optimal results.”

Everything, the document posits, has the potential to be streamlined.

A firm that operates in secrecy

What McKinsey recommended in its initial proposal in response to that document, though, is unclear. The Tribune has submitted a public records request for that bid and has not yet received a response from the U. But the company often requires those with whom it contracts to protect its documents as proprietary and containing trade secrets.

It has left McKinsey’s work, particularly at universities, shrouded in secrecy.

Advertisement

The U. did say McKinsey’s proposal won the bid out of the 10 companies that also submitted plans. Graham said the firm was selected from three finalists because of its “experience doing transformation efforts” and that its price was “one of the lowest.”

Neil Grace, a spokesperson for the firm, called it a “competitively won RFP.” On other questions, though, he declined comment.

“In your discussions with the University of Utah, they should have addressed a number of your questions and we defer to them on the answers,” he said.

McKinsey started working with the school, in an initial phase, in fall 2023. The first portion of the work, Graham said, involved looking at the university’s internal data, studying its systems and developing an understanding of what’s working and not. That cost $3.2 million over a nine month period.

The company came up with a document of areas that could be improved. But the U. has declined to release that because it says it’s a protected “draft” under Utah law, and the document continues to change depending on what suggestions the school does or does not choose to move forward with.

Advertisement

So the full scope of McKinsey’s recommendations, after looking at how the U. operates, is also being concealed — despite taxpayers footing the bill for the work at the public university.

At other schools, there have been complaints that the final work wasn’t relevant to the institution and had been recycled, without specific or targeted goals for their university.

One professor at the University of Arizona, who complained about the consulting work there, told The Arizona Daily Star: “None of it was specific to higher education, which is a lot more complicated than a corporate hierarchy. I expected more for what they were charging.”

(Christopher Cherrington | The Salt Lake Tribune)

The U. also agreed to an extension for another nine months, bringing the total cost to $6 million, Graham said; that second phase expires at the end of this month. It is focused on training employees at the U. to do the same kind of work as McKinsey’s consultants — looking for deficiencies, finding fixes and expanding efforts to “optimize” other areas of campus.

Advertisement

“They’re not telling us what to do,” Graham said of the company. “We make all the decisions.”

The point was to combine the outside perspectives from McKinsey with the “use of our good people” at the U., he added. Universities using consulting groups have often been criticized for overlooking their own resources on campus that could do the same kind of analysis; Graham said he didn’t want that to happen at the U.

The university has started to address a few of the items on the list it says are the easiest and quickest to change, while also having a sizable impact. Bigger projects will come in the future.

What work has been done?

Graham emphasized that the “Operational Excellence” work at the U. started before the Legislature’s focus on cost savings in higher education — not in reaction to it. But the goals aren’t in opposition.

“Cost is always on our minds,” Graham said. “We realize there’s great sacrifice by students.”

Advertisement

He pointed to one project that has already saved the U., the state and students money: A look at how the first phase of the new West Village student housing for families and graduate students went when construction began in fall 2021, and what could be learned before starting phase two.

The school studied how the next area could be built more efficiently: how to communicate better with contractors, how to get supplies at a cheaper rate and where they didn’t need to spend as much on unnecessary infrastructure.

The U. was able to build the second phase, Graham said, for about 15% less than projected.

The school went to the Legislature and was able to reduce the amount that it needed to bond for. And it also plans to charge students less to live there. The total savings, collected over time — including not paying interest on as high of a bond — will amount to $18 million.

And the same lessons are being applied to new construction on campus down the line. Similarly, the U. has also decided to tackle what’s called “deferred maintenance” projects to save money.

Advertisement

Deferred maintenance is upkeep on older buildings that’s often pushed off for other priorities; the university’s list includes about $16 million in projects. The McKinsey study found that addressing those fixes sooner can “reduce future capital expenses by 300% or more by correcting issues before they grow into capital needs,” like more expensive repairs or needing to fully tear down and replace a building.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) The University of Utah library is pictured on Tuesday, Dec. 10, 2024.

The U. has changed, too, its process for purchasing supplies — from chemistry beakers to pens and paper.

For decades, the school had a central warehouse on campus. It was tricky to get supplies delivered there and then shuffled out to different buildings. Often, Graham found, faculty and staff were making purchases directly through Amazon or Costco instead. So the U. decided to match that workflow and make it uniform.

The school phased out operating its own warehouse. The employees that worked there were retrained to now help process online orders for departments. And the U. negotiated, too, with providers to get better rates on products.

Advertisement

The space that the warehouse was taking up on campus is also now new real estate that the school can expand and use for a different purpose.

Some of the projects, Graham says, may seem “boring,” but are worthwhile. That includes making sure all faculty and staff are using the same set process for booking travel for out-of-state conferences, which should save an estimated $500,000 by the end of 2027.

“This effort is far different than cost cutting,” Graham said.

One project the U. is eyeing for the future is making parking on campus more efficient. Right now, it’s one of the most cited frustrations for employees and students, who say they get stuck circling around lots looking for a spot.

The university hopes, through the McKinsey model, that it can eventually streamline parking with cameras to direct drivers to lots with empty spaces.

Advertisement

That project is still a ways off, Graham said, but he sees it as part of the vision of what “Operational Excellence” can do to transform campus. The U. also plans to put much of its savings into faculty and staff salaries and benefits, which account for roughly half of the school’s operating expenses each year.

Faculty remain concerned

Some faculty and staff are worried, though, about the U. working with McKinsey — and not having transparency on the full extent of what the firm has recommended.

Hollis Robbins, who recently stepped down as the dean of the U.’s College of Humanities, wrote about the increasing dependence by universities on outside consultants, saying it signals “a fundamental crisis in higher education leadership.”

“The problem with hiring McKinsey has always been that its consultants come away better than the client, as a matter of pocketbook, morale and wisdom,” she added.

McKinsey will get $6 million from the U., as well as a trove of valuable data on the institution that it could then use in contracts with new schools to make comparisons.

Advertisement

Like other detractors, Robbins believe the work could be done by experts already at schools: the professors who know how to do similar studies and inherently understand the purposes and day-to-day operations of higher education — but whom are instead fearful that McKinsey is proposing cutting their jobs or departments, like the firm has done at corporations it’s advised.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) The Warnock Engineering building on the University of Utah campus is pictured on Monday, April 22, 2024.

Several professors reached out to The Tribune saying that hiring the firm sent shock waves of anxiety across campus. None wanted to use their name for fear of retaliation for speaking out.

They pointed to concerning examples of McKinsey’s past work, including its recent recommendation that University of Michigan researchers be pushed to produce more, while also cutting $150 million in expenses, according to reporting from The State News. The initial phase of that contracted consulting cost $2 million.

Despite being a global company garnering roughly $16 billion in revenue annually, in recent years, McKinsey has also laid off its own staff. It cut 350 jobs in 2024 and about 2,000 in 2023.

Advertisement

“That was not our charge,” Graham said when asked if the “Operational Excellence” project included talk of staff cuts. McKinsey’s spokesperson, Neil Grace, though, declined to answer questions on whether the firm’s recommendations to the U. included that.

“Like all our work in higher education, the University of Utah partnered with us to enhance and deliver better on its mission, including improving student and research outcomes and providing a better experience for students, faculty and staff,” he said.

Grace also declined to say if the firm was working with other schools in Utah, again citing a policy of confidentiality with its clients.

The $6 million spent by the U. on McKinsey is a small share of the school’s total annual operating revenue, accounting for about 0.1%. And the U. says the savings gleaned from the consulting will more than make up for it.

But those who are concerned have compared the total to public higher education budget cuts expected from the Legislature this year. Those are set to have a price tag of $60 million across the state, and the U.’s share will be about $20 million.

Advertisement

The money used on McKinsey, then, is 30% of that figure that faculty and staff instead have been told to make up from their departments. One professor said, to him, that doesn’t seem like “efficiency” or “operational excellence.”

Note to readers • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.

(Bethany Baker | The Salt Lake Tribune) The University of Utah in Salt Lake City on Wednesday, April 17, 2024.



Source link

Advertisement

Utah

A new law in Utah allows students to opt out of coursework that conflicts with their beliefs

Published

on

A new law in Utah allows students to opt out of coursework that conflicts with their beliefs


OGDEN, Utah — The syllabus in 18-year-old Madelynn Wells’ introductory film studies class assigned “Jaws” first, and then the Spanish dark comedy “Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown.” She said she watched those, and did the written assignments with no problem. 

Around the third week of the term, the assignment was a film called “Pariah.” She hadn’t heard of it, so she looked it up and found that it was a coming-of-age film about a young woman who turned away from her conservative family to live as a lesbian.

Wells, a freshman at Weber State University who said she’s a devout Catholic and a political conservative, felt uneasy. She didn’t want to watch the film, and the idea of writing a paper on it made her even more uncomfortable. 

Advertisement

“I feel like whenever you put something in writing it just feels more serious,” Wells said. 

She decided to drop the class. 

In Utah, with a large and devout religious population, Wells is not alone in trying to uphold her religious beliefs while getting a college education. 

A new state law offers these students a unique protection: If something in a class conflicts with their strongly held religious or personal beliefs, students can ask their professor for an alternative assignment or exam. And as long as their request doesn’t change the fundamental nature of the course, the professor is now required by law to allow the student to opt out. 

Advertisement

The law has some guardrails that protect against accommodation requests that are universally considered absurd. For example, a student won’t be able to claim a moral objection to math in a college algebra course. And the law requires faculty to make these accommodations only in courses that are part of a college’s general education requirement or are required for the student’s major.

Despite those protections, the law is polarizing. Proponents say that students shouldn’t be required to do assignments or take exams on topics that compromise their morals unless it’s absolutely necessary to advance in their field of study. Opponents argue that engaging with beliefs they don’t hold helps students understand their own views better. 

This Utah law is the first of its kind targeting higher education, but it’s an extension of concerns being expressed at the K-12 level. There have been efforts to emphasize conservative and religious values in public schools, and limit what can be taught about subjects including racial history, gender and sexuality. The Utah law is also reminiscent of a case the Supreme Court took up last year, in which the justices sided with parents of public school students who wanted to take their children out of class during lessons that violate their religious beliefs — such as using books about LGBTQ+ identities. President Donald Trump has said that colleges are “corrupting our youth and society with woke, socialist, and anti-American ideology.” 

And over the past few years, there have been dozens of state-level bills — including one in Utah — banning initiatives or programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI. Lawmakers in other states have gone after what’s taught in the classroom and how certain issues, like race and gender identity, are discussed. The legislative approach here is different. Instead of dictating what can or cannot be taught, the new Utah law shifts the power to students who now have the agency to decide when curriculum crosses a line for them. 

Amy Reid, who directs the Freedom to Learn initiative at the free speech advocacy organization PEN America, said it’s the responsibility of faculty to help all students get the most out of what’s being taught. Some accommodations — like those for students with disabilities or religious students who need to reschedule exams for religious holidays — help faculty meet that goal, she said. This one, she said, does not. 

Advertisement

Rather than “encourage students to shut their eyes or plug their ears or throw a book out the window,” she said, “You encourage students to engage with ideas, and you provide them with the support that they need — which can be different for individual students — so that they are able to complete the work.”

“Being exposed to ideas that you disagree with doesn’t mean you’re going to change your mind, but it should make you clearer about what it is that you believe and why,” Reid added.

Interested in more news about colleges and universities? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter.

Wells, a zoology major, was taking the film course to fulfill a general education arts credit. After dropping it, she had more than two dozen other classes to choose from to earn that credit. She picked photography. 

Advertisement

But if she had needed the course to graduate, she said she would have had to swallow her discomfort or work up the courage to talk to her professor about an alternative assignment. In the case of the film studies course, perhaps she could have watched a different coming-of-age film, or another film by a Black screenwriter — depending on the goal of that assignment. (Her professor declined to comment.) 

Seth Mulkey, a junior at Utah State University in Logan, said he felt uncomfortable in his general education biology class when the course topic turned to evolution. Mulkey, an evangelical Christian, said he believes that God created the Earth in seven days.

“It can be a bit disheartening to have to learn about something and have something proposed as fact when it’s not something that you’re in agreement with,” Mulkey said. He tries to keep his beliefs to himself and instead, he said, “I’ll do my best to engage from an intellectual standpoint with this idea. So, if this is the assumption we’re making about how this works, we’ll talk about it, we’ll see what conclusions are there.” 

Even if the law had been in effect when he took that biology class, Mulkey said he wouldn’t have asked for an accommodation to get out of uncomfortable group discussions. But writing assignments might have been a different story. 

“If the assignment were to write an essay supporting this view, write an essay about why evolution is correct and why it is the right view of the creation of the world — I think at that point, I would want to step back,” Mulkey said. 

Advertisement

Politicians say left-wing professors push their views. New poll shows students don’t see it that way

Utah appears to be the most religious state in the country. About 76 percent of Utah residents are religious, compared to only about 49 percent nationwide, according to a 2024 report from the Gardner Policy Institute at the University of Utah. Data from the Pew Research Center shows that about 50 percent of all residents are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and another 13 percent identify as members of other Christian denominations. 

Michael J. Petersen, a Republican state representative from Logan, said the idea for the bill came after his daughter was assigned to write a letter to a legislator in support of LGBTQ+ rights as part of a master’s degree program at an out-of-state college. The assignment was in conflict with her beliefs, so she called her dad for help. 

He helped her write “something that was very, very bland.” She moved on — and he began drafting the legislation. 

Had Petersen’s daughter been an undergraduate student at a public college in Utah, the law would have helped her in two ways. It would have prohibited her instructor from requiring that she take a specific public stance (such as sending a letter) on anything that is a “political, social, religious, moral, or community matter.” And it would have allowed her to ask her professor for an alternative assignment.

Advertisement

Petersen said he believes that his daughter’s assignment was to write the letter and also send it. (The Hechinger Report was not able to independently confirm this.)

Most faculty and education advocates, whatever their politics, agree that requiring her to send the letter would be inappropriate.

Mike Gavin, the president and CEO of the Alliance for Higher Education, said it is reasonable for a professor to ask a student to take on other perspectives during an in-class debate or in a written assignment. But it shouldn’t be taken outside the classroom. 

“In no way, shape or form should they be required to publicly sign their names to something. That would be very problematic,” Gavin said. “That, I think, would be a personnel issue that an institution should handle. That is not an academic freedom issue. That is actually using students for things that are political.” 

And, he said, in 30 years in higher education he’s never heard of it happening. 

Advertisement

Gavin said he thinks it’s unnecessary to give students such broad permission to opt out of coursework that conflicts with their beliefs. There are cases in which it’s appropriate, but those already come up and are handled on a case-by-case basis between professors and students, he said. 

“It’s entirely probable — I say this facetiously and also seriously — that a freshman in college doesn’t know everything yet,” Gavin said. “They need to engage with ideas they have not come across. Even if they end up being uncomfortable for a minute, that doesn’t mean that they’re traumatized.” 

Conservative-leaning civic centers now teach courses at public colleges 

Outside of Utah, many people might gawk at the idea of students opting out of coursework that makes them feel uncomfortable, and worry about the broader implications of such a policy. But among Utahns, there seem to be wider-ranging and more nuanced perspectives.

It’s partly because they’ve been down this road before. In 1998, a Mormon theater student at the University of Utah objected to reading a script with profanity. The student sued the university, accusing faculty of essentially pushing her out after she was given the choice to recite the lines as written or leave the program. 

Advertisement

A settlement agreement required the university to write a policy to deal with coursework objections related to sincerely held beliefs. But the policy still requires that students be able to understand and articulate ideas and theories that are important to the course, regardless of whether they agree with or believe them. The new law does away with that requirement. 

High school speech and debate allows students to find common ground 

Sarah Projansky, the vice provost for faculty and academic affairs at the University of Utah and a professor of film and gender studies who has examined the representation of sexual violence in film and media, said she’s had students walk out of class film screenings during intense moments. If a student says they can’t watch a certain film, she says she works with them to find an alternative. 

“It’s not my business why a student can’t be there. Religion, sincerely held belief of conscience, memory, family memory. It doesn’t matter, they can’t be there,” Projansky said. “Anything that’s not pedagogically necessary is very easy to accommodate.”

Nicole Allen, a communications professor at Utah State, said she thought the law was “a solution in search of a problem,” given existing policies at public institutions and the fact that most professors are able to handle these issues on a case-by-case basis. 

Advertisement

Still, she thinks there’s no need for students to experience “gratuitous discomfort” in the name of academia, she said, as long as accommodations wouldn’t take away from the big-picture goals of the course. 

Although the law doesn’t concern what professors are allowed to teach, some worry that it could still influence academic freedom.

Reid, of PEN America, worries that faculty may overcorrect. They might leave controversial reading materials off their syllabuses or dodge subjects that tend to make students feel uncomfortable, in order to avoid consequences. Those range from the extra work of writing new assignments and test questions to the bureaucratic headache that comes with denying a request to, in the worst and least likely scenario, becoming caught up in a public controversy if a student takes issue with something they’re being taught. 

She said it makes sense that professors would not want to end up like Melissa McCoul, who was fired from Texas A&M University after a student recorded her teaching about gender identity, or Mel Curth, the graduate teaching assistant who lost her job at the University of Oklahoma after she failed a student who had turned in a poorly written psychology paper using only the Bible as a source. 

Behind the turmoil of federal attacks on colleges, some states are coming after tenure 

Advertisement

Though students can now choose to opt out of coursework on difficult topics, many Utah public colleges go to great lengths to encourage them to do the opposite outside the classroom. Many institutions host regular forums where students can come together for facilitated conversations on controversial topics and engage with classmates who hold differing opinions. Often, the colleges offer free lunch to incentivize students to dig into tough topics. 

At Weber State, the dialogue programming is run by the Walker Institute of Politics and Public Service. On a recent Wednesday, a group of students, staff, and current and retired professors came together at a long, conference room table to discuss the war in Iran over sub sandwiches and chips. 

Strict rules protect the integrity of conversations: Everyone has to read the same article, there’s to be no use of tech devices and no note-taking, and nothing that is said should be shared outside that space. 

Leah A. Murray, the institute’s director and a professor of political science and philosophy, said the rules exist so that everyone feels comfortable speaking freely. (The group made an exception to the no note-taking rule for the reporter in the room.) 

Advertisement

Sometimes Murray selects the topic, but sometimes the topic comes from a student.

Adam Nichols, a 43-year-old junior who is studying to become a high school teacher, said he proposed the idea to Murray because he wanted to be able to talk about the Iran conflict with people in his life, but he felt he didn’t quite have the language to feel comfortable doing so.

When he’s been forced to reckon with his strongly held beliefs, both in class and in various Walker Institute Talks, he said, “It forces me to reassess other areas where I may have been wrong. And I would much rather be wrong and be corrected than to continue under those false pretenses.” 

Despite her appreciation for difficult conversations with people she doesn’t necessarily agree with, Murray sees value in making the types of accommodations in the law. Her views are informed by her own experience as a vegan, animal-loving undergraduate who opted to fulfill her science requirement with geology instead of biology to avoid having to dissect a pig.

“I was unwilling to do that,” Murray said. “It was a violation of my conscience at that time.”

Advertisement

She said that experience has also informed the way she handles difficult issues with her students. At the beginning of each term, she says, “If you’re going to go to hell for learning this, please drop this class.”

She delivers it just like that, she said, and her students always laugh. But she’s serious. 

“I don’t want to be responsible for your salvation being denied because you learn something in this class.”

Contact staff writer Olivia Sanchez at 212-678-8402 or osanchez@hechingerreport.org

This story about religious beliefs and college students was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

Advertisement

This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/new-law-utah-student-coursework-religious-beliefs/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

<img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=116311&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/new-law-utah-student-coursework-religious-beliefs/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>



Source link

Continue Reading

Utah

Utah Royals FC Returns Home to Host Racing Louisville FC Chasing Eight Match Unbeaten Streak | Utah Royals

Published

on

Utah Royals FC Returns Home to Host Racing Louisville FC Chasing Eight Match Unbeaten Streak |  Utah Royals


HERRIMAN, Utah (Thursday, May 14, 2026) — Utah Royals FC (5-2-2, 17 pts) returns to the Beehive State this weekend to host Racing Louisville FC (2-1-5, 7 pts) for the first meeting between the two clubs during the 2026 campaign on Sunday, May 17, at America First Field. Kickoff is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. MT.

Utah enters Sunday’s contest following a hard-fought 0-0 road draw against Bay FC at PayPal Park, earning another clean sheet while continuing the club’s streak of never allowing Bay FC to score at home against Utah Royals FC. The point on the road marked Utah’s 11th away point of the 2026 campaign, equaling the club’s combined road-point total from both the 2024 and 2025 seasons.

Advertisement

The Royals were tested throughout the opening half, with one of Bay FC’s best opportunities coming in the 40th minute when Racheal Kundananji broke forward on a dangerous run through the middle of the pitch before entering the penalty area. Midfielder Narumi came up with a crucial defensive stop, diving in front of the attempt and deflecting the shot away with her leg to preserve the scoreless draw. The sequence highlighted Utah’s defensive commitment, with multiple Royals players sprinting back to disrupt the Bay FC attack and protect the clean sheet heading into halftime.

Utah continued to remain organized defensively throughout the second half, limiting Bay FC’s opportunities and securing its fifth clean sheet of the 2026 season. The result extended the Royals’ unbeaten streak to seven consecutive matches while also leaving Bay FC winless against Utah through five all-time meetings between the clubs.

With the result, Utah extended its unbeaten streak to seven consecutive matches, continuing the Royals’ impressive run of form heading into Sunday’s home match against Racing Louisville FC.

Advertisement

Head Coach Jimmy Coenraets and his squad now look to build on an impressive seven-match unbeaten streak, alongside multiple consecutive clean sheets against Chicago Stars FC, Seattle Reign FC, Angel City FC, Houston Dash, and most recently Bay FC. The result against Bay extended Utah’s strong run of form as the Royals continue to establish themselves as one of the league’s toughest defensive sides. Utah now returns home looking to carry that momentum into America First Field in front of its home crowd while aiming to extend both its unbeaten streak and defensive success.

Now in his second full season at the helm, Head Coach Coenraets continues molding a balanced squad built on defensive discipline, midfield control, and attacking creativity. Sunday’s contest presents another opportunity for Utah to extend its unbeaten streak to eight consecutive matches while collecting crucial points at home in front of the club’s supporters at America First Field.

Advertisement

Racing Louisville FC enters the matchup with a 2-1-5 record, most recently earning a 3-1 home victory over Portland Thorns FC after suffering back-to-back defeats. Led by Head Coach Bev Yanez, Racing Louisville FC will look to build on its return to winning form and secure all three points on the road at America First Field.

Sunday’s contest marks the tenth match of the 2026 NWSL regular season for the Royals and the ninth for Racing Louisville FC, with both sides aiming to secure valuable early-season points and strengthen their position in the league standings.

WATCH LIVE on Victory+ with Josh Eastern and McCall Zerboni :: Utah Royals FC vs Racing Louisville | America First Field | 6:00 p.m. MT

Advertisement

WATCH LIVE on Victory+ with Kelley O’Hara and Ali Riley :: Utah Royals FC vs Racing Louisville | America First Field | 6:00 p.m. MT

LISTEN via KSL Sports Radio (102.7 FM / 1160 AM) starting at 5:30 p.m. MT

Advertisement

Following Sunday’s match, Utah Royals FC will remain in the Beehive State to host inaugural side Denver Summit FC on Saturday, May 23, at America First Field. Kickoff is scheduled for 4:30 p.m. MT, with tickets available for purchase here.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Utah

‘It means building hope’: USU brings independence to refugee group through chicken coop project

Published

on

‘It means building hope’: USU brings independence to refugee group through chicken coop project


SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — Refugee communities in Utah are being supplied with farm-fresh eggs and poultry thanks to a collaborative effort between Utah State University and Utah Refugee Goats.

According to Utah Refugee Goats (URG), their goat and poultry farm supplies refugee communities with reliable, affordable and culturally familiar sources of meat. Thanks to Utah State University (USU) agriculture students, it’s getting some ‘egg’stra attention.

Over the last 10 weeks, Brad Borges, a Ph.D candidate for career and technical education, has been taking a hands-on approach with his students to construct a new chicken coop with the support of a mobile construction lab and a $20,000 grant.

According to URG President Abdikadir Hussein, the coop is equipped with fully enclosed roofs and will increase their flock by 40%, meaning faster growth for the Salt Lake City-based farm. As a refugee, though, Hussein said it means even more.

Advertisement

“It means resiliency. It means independence. It means building hope. Hopelessness is something that is killing the most refugees inside,” he expressed. “I came as a refugee, and hope is the last everything that ever came to mind.”

“We feel like even the birds are happy, like they want to get into there,” he added.

From the student perspective, being able to build a project that will be used to generate money for refugee groups was incredibly engaging and inspirational, according to Borges. The sentiment is shared by Joseph Okoh, extension assistant professor of small acreage livestock.

“It’s a win-win situation for everyone,” Okoh said. One, we are getting the coop for the refugee group, these students are going to learn from the construction of the coop, and not only that, everybody is going to be happy to be part of this community to be able to develop a better coop for better production.”

To learn more about issues facing refugees in Utah and how to support them, visit Utah Refugee Goats’ website.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending