Numerous studies examine public journalism efforts through the practitioner's lens, but scholars, for the most part, have ignored an important aspect of the journalism reform movement -- how journalism educators teach public journalism. David Kurpius, an associate professor of journalism at Louisiana State University, helps bridge this gap in his study of journalism education. In this Kettering Foundation report, Kurpius interviews journalism professors deemed most likely to include public journalism instruction in their syllabi and classroom teaching. He argues that public journalism poses a serious challenge to journalism educators, with many professors missing the democratic connections that are necessary building blocks for students to understand and practice public journalism.

At state and institutional levels, leaders are discussing and enacting policy changes that could shape the future of higher education for decades -- especially public higher education. But when citizens talk about the mission of higher education today, their conversations are different from those of policymakers. How do their values and concerns intersect with the arguments and ideas leaders are putting forward? What are their hopes for -- and concerns about -- higher education? What do they value? What changes do they need to think about and deliberate?

This report to the Kettering Foundation, prepared by Public Agenda, describes the thinking of college students, parents, professors, employers, retirees, and others who gathered in more than 115 public forums, titled "Shaping Our Future," around the country in 2012 -- 2013 to deliberate on the future of higher education. Using a short issue guide, they considered three alternative options for higher education:

• Emphasizing science and technology education to help the economy;
• Offering students a rich, broad education and emphasizing principles such as responsibility, integrity, and working together;
• Expanding opportunity by helping more students attend college and graduate.

The aspirations, observations, and sometimes-conflicted feelings voiced by forum participants are summarized in this report, along with some further questions that arose: What does it mean to be well educated? What does it mean to be prepared for a world of work that changes continually? How do we make higher education affordable -- for governments and for students? What do we mean by "equal opportunity" in higher education? The country needs and could benefit from more public deliberation on the future of higher education, bringing leaders together with students, faculty, and citizens in the broader community to engage these questions.

In 2012 -- 2013, NIF forums held around the country have brought college students, high school students, parents, faculty, employers, retirees, and others together to deliberate about the mission of higher education and the role it should play in the nation's social, political, and economic progress. This interim report finds that Americans outside the policymaking arena want to think and talk about the mission of higher education and its role in shaping our collective future. How does their vision compare with that of leaders now proposing and adopting reforms? The challenge highlighted here is that the country is now having two very different, largely separate, conversations about the future of higher education.

This Kettering Foundation report by Bernie Ronan comes at a critical time in the effort to strengthen the role of higher education in a democracy. In the last 20 years, higher education institutions have begun to pay a great deal of attention to the civic engagement of college students. Nevertheless, proponents of civic engagement in higher education are now reporting a certain sense of "drift" or of having reached a "plateau." A key issue in this impasse is the lack of consensus over whether and how civic engagement efforts should be directed toward outcomes that can be considered "political." Reinforced by signals they receive from their institutions, students may, ironically, see civic engagement as an alternative to politics, and come away from their experiences with even less confidence in their capacities as citizens. Ronan's "spectrum" approach to civic learning offers an ingenious conceptual (and strategic) solution to this problem. As a developmental framework, the civic spectrum recognizes the importance of beginning with students where they are, but also of connecting them to a robust conception of citizenship through experiences of collective decision making and cooperative action across differences that are sorely lacking in the current higher education landscape.

This report examines the ways in which local educational institutions, legal service providers, and immigrant youth advocates have responded to the first phase of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Based on extensive interviews with stakeholders in seven states -- California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Texas -- the report identifies initiatives undertaken by educational institutions and other community stakeholders to support DACA youth's education and training success, and examine the impact of deferred action on grantees' academic and career pursuits. It provides examples of promising practices, additional challenges, and key takeaways at the high school, postsecondary, and adult education levels, as well as an exploration of the nature and scope of DACA legal outreach initiatives.

As documented in part one of this series, the high school completion rate of blacks is currently at the highest it has ever been. This second installment turns to college entry and completion. The data show that blacks are starting -- and finishing -- college at higher rates than in the past, but they still lag far behind whites.