An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Earlier this summer, nearly 160,000 applicants took the entrance exam for UNAM, Mexico's largest university. For the first time, they did it completely remotely, using a "lockdown" browser and AI-powered webcam proctoring software, over several weeks from late May through early June. It was a disaster. When exam results came in, they bore little resemblance to past results, especially at the top. Between 2021 and 2025, 3.5 percent of test takers scored 100 or more on the 120-question UNAM test. This year, 16.3 percent did so. The story was even worse at the highest of the high end. Between 2021 and 2025, 0.9 percent of test takers scored 110 or more; this year, 5.5 percent did so. The surge in top scores led to accusations of widespread cheating, and UNAM appointed a commission of experts to investigate the situation. The group was given the unwieldy name "la Comision Tecnica de Personas Expertas para la Revision del Proceso de Seleccion de Ingreso a Licenciatura para el Circlo Escolar 2026-2027/1," and it has just submitted its recommendations. The commission believes that the best path forward, given all the concerns, is to administer a "control exam" -- that is, applicants will have to sit for another test, and they will do so in person. This control exam will apply not only to those who secured a spot at UNAM based on this year's test but also to everyone who would have been admitted based on minimum successful scores in their program of study since 2021. About 58,000 people could be affected, and places at UNAM will now depend on the results of the new test. (Details on the control exam should appear soon; classes are currently scheduled to begin on August 10, so everything will have to move quickly unless the school decides to delay classes.) According to Gaceta UNAM, the school's official news publication, the university rector has apologized to honest applicants, since they will now have to prepare for and take the test again despite doing nothing wrong. Still, the control exam is "necessary to give certainty and guarantee equity in access," the rector added.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Arizona State University has launched a 120-credit bachelor's degree in content creation that teaches video, podcasting, branding, analytics, media law, and social strategy. For their capstone, students are "expected to build a real social media account and demonstrate audience growth during the program," reports Dexerto. From the report: The Content Creation BA is housed within ASU's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication and appears in the university's 2026-2027 course catalog. The 120-credit-hour degree prepares students to become "an influencer and strategic storyteller" by teaching video production, podcasting, personal branding, audience analytics and social media strategy. The program was approved by the ASU University Senate in March 2026. Its proposal said graduates would be prepared to work independently as influencers and content creators across livestreaming, videography, writing, podcasting, graphics and emerging media. [...] For the program's final project, students will choose a social media platform, such as TikTok, create a content and growth strategy, and attempt to gain real followers throughout the semester. "They will have demonstrable audience growth," [explained Jessica Pucci, senior associate dean at the Cronkite School]. "They will have a platform of their choice with real content and real followers and a real audience behind them." The curriculum includes courses titled How to Become an Influencer, On-Camera Presence, Introduction to Editing, Videography, Podcasting and Audio Storytelling, Social Media Foundations and The Digital Audience.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from Inside Higher Ed: For the first time since he started teaching Welfare Economics and Social Choice Theory nearly two decades ago, Brown University economics professor Roberto Serrano gave his students a take-home midterm this spring. Quite a few students had expressed anxiety about being in a classroom after a gunman killed two students and injured nine in a December mass shooting at Brown, and so "it was appropriate," he said, to allow students to take their exams at home. But by the end of the semester, Serrano regretted the decision. Dozens of students in the class likely used artificial intelligence to cheat and earn perfect or near-perfect scores on their midterm, he said. Serrano in turn made the final exam in-person, which led more than a dozen students to drop the course and even more to fail it. Administrators' response to the widespread cheating event has been "meek," he said, and the incident has raised questions about how universities can -- and should -- respond to AI-enabled cheating at scale. "I am not declaring [the midterm] void for now. I am going to give the class a chance to prove me wrong," he wrote. "That is, if the distribution of the final exam is roughly similar to the distribution of the midterm, I will count the midterm. Otherwise, which is of course what I expect to happen, I will declare the midterm void and reweigh the final accordingly." Serrano heard crickets from his students, but 18 of them subsequently dropped the class. Nine students remained enrolled but did not take the final exam. And Serrano said the results proved him right; three students earned a zero, and the average score on the final was 48.6 percent -- by far a historic low, he said. Previously, the average final exam score had never dropped below 65 percent. Only a few students scored similarly to how they did on the midterm.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Mount Royal University in Calgary says hackers stole and then deleted data from its file storage systems after breaching the university's network. [...]

A China-linked threat cluster has been exploiting vulnerable Roundcube servers at U.S. and Canadian universities to steal credentials and deploy backdoor malware. [...]

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the New York Times: The number of students admitted to Ph.D. programs this fall dropped 15 percent from the previous year, according to data from over 50 top research universities, raising fears that the nation's capacity to produce new science could be diminished. The decline is driven, in part, by a chaotic and unpredictable federal funding environment under the Trump administration, as federal cuts are promised and then reversed, and budgets remain unclear. A reduction in doctoral students could mean fewer scholars at universities to teach and mentor undergraduates. Higher education leaders also worry that, if the declines continue, there will be fewer researchers to power a rapidly evolving scientific work force. The data showing the decrease comes from 55 universities, all of them members of the Association of American Universities, an invitation-only organization that includes 69 of the most prestigious research institutions in the United States. The data collection was conducted by another group, the Association of American Universities Data Exchange. Schools in A.A.U. confer half of the nation's research doctorates, according to the association. "We are at risk of losing a whole generation of new talent because of the reduction in the capacity to support those students," said Toby Smith, a senior vice president at the A.A.U. University leaders and research advocates cite many reasons for the declines in new doctoral students. Key federal agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, have been funding fewer research grants. The wealthiest institutions also face a new federal tax on their endowments. But the most cited reason in interviews was the unreliable nature of federal funding under the Trump administration. The administration proposed major cuts to federal research agencies last year, but Congress restored the funding. It is again proposing big cuts. While Congress may again reverse the administration's proposed reductions, the uncertainty makes it hard for schools to make multiyear commitments to doctoral students. The administration also abruptly ended thousands of research grants last year, arguing that they did not align with the government's priorities. The administration restored many of the grants after judges deemed the eliminations illegal and arbitrary, but research advocates say the whiplash was damaging.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BrianFagioli writes: Google CEO Sundar Pichai delivered Stanford University's 2026 commencement address, but despite leading one of the companies at the center of the AI boom, he spent very little time discussing artificial intelligence. Instead, the speech focused on optimism, working on hard things, and following your interests. The omission is notable given how many graduates are entering a job market being reshaped by AI. While Pichai briefly referenced a "rewiring of technology," he largely avoided discussing AI's impact on careers, automation, or the future of work. Was the Google CEO intentionally steering clear of a controversial topic, or was he simply trying to deliver a timeless commencement speech rather than a technology-focused one? Hyping AI during a commencement speech has been a surefire way to get boos -- unless you're Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak, who reminded college graduates that they already posses "AI" of their own: "actual intelligence." You can read Pichai's commencement speech here. "If you're not from here, California is advertised as being really lush and green. But when I looked out the window, it was more... brown," said Pichai during his speech. "I guess I said this out loud, I'm not sure why. My host, Mrs. Jane Earl, gently corrected me. 'We prefer to call it golden,' she said.And that's exactly what I mean by choosing optimism. It's about reframing for the positive: Where I saw brown, she saw golden. This slight change of perspective had a huge ripple effect on how I thought about the world around me."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Futurism reports: in a new essay for The Chronicle Higher Education, university-level literature and writing instructor Tyler Jagt recalls how not a single one of his students could get through an assigned 20-page article, something that he had read "without complaint" as an undergraduate a decade ago. One student confessed that the reason they didn't finish was that they kept losing track of what the paper was about. And there's no doubt that they're not alone. Jagt cites the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress reading assessment results released last year. It showed that 12th grade reading scores were at the lowest level since the assessment began in 1992. Nearly a third of those 12th graders scored below the assessment's "basic" level in reading, meaning they likely "cannot draw general conclusions based on concepts presented explicitly in a text." Younger children aren't better off: a recent report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation found that 70 percent of fourth graders, or around two million kids, can't read at a proficient level. "What I am seeing in my classroom is no longer a hunch," Jagt writes. "There is a measurable, generational collapse in sustained reading and writing, and the academy is responding to it with improvisation and exhaustion rather than the structural overhaul it requires...." Jagt cites an MIT study that found users who used ChatGPT during cognitive tasks like writing essays showed lower brain activity in areas associated with creativity compared to students who only used a traditional Google Search or didn't lookup information at all. An astonishing 83 percent of the AI users couldn't quote a single line from the essays they had just written, and capstoning the alarm, the brain activity in the AI users didn't return to normal when they were later asked to write without AI... On our pernicious pocket devices, Jagt touted a 2017 study that found that simply having a smartphone physically nearby — even if it's face down or turned off — reduced available cognitive capacity and impaired cognitive functioning. "So when a student tells me they 'kept losing track' of a 20-page article, I have to acknowledge that they may be describing a measurable neurological condition," Jagt wrote. "The neural pathways that support sustained attention are built by use, and they atrophy without it. Your body is a use-it-or-lose-it system, and the brain is no exception." Sunday an "Ask Reddit" question went viral — drawing over 11,000 upvotes — for its question to any teachers reading Reddit. "Is the 'Gen Alpha can't read (write, or do math ext)' crisis real? If so how bad is it?" Some responses... "The run of the mill non-honors kids have gotten really bad," posted one high school teacher. "Very low tolerance for working hard, very short attention span, very short stamina for active listening... It's the group that is the most worrying because a decade ago, I'd estimate that maybe 10-20% of kids at a school are like this, and now it's probably 40-50% of each graduating class... Then there's of course the bottom 10-20% kids (excluding the special ed/severe/moderate learning disability kids). This is what the viral videos are about and it's not an exaggeration. They can't read, write, or do very basic math like multiplication or division as a 17 year old." "This is the first year the MAJORITY of my class cheated on their first essays...." posted one high school English teacher. "It was also the first year a kid yelled 'We don't care about your fucking books, Miss!' while I was in front of the class presenting books they might be interested in for their book reviews... Almost all of them cheated on the book review they had to write." Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 for sharing the article.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

OpenAI says two employees' devices were breached in the recent TanStack supply chain attack that impacted hundreds of npm and PyPI packages, causing the company to rotate code-signing certificates for its applications as a precaution. [...]

The Senate’s top Democrat called on the Department of Homeland Security Friday to work closely with state and local governments to defend against artificial intelligence-strengthened hacks. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin to make sure state, local, tribal and territorial (SLTT) governments aren’t left behind as AI models advance, posing new hacking threats.

“There is a race between cybersecurity defenders and AI-enabled hacking — and there’s no time to waste,” Schumer wrote.

“While the White House has reportedly begun hosting meetings about its internal security priorities following these frontier AI cyber breakthroughs, it is glaringly obvious that the Department of Homeland Security needs an updated plan for coordinating these efforts with [state, local, tribal and territorial] governments and implementing procedures to reduce the risk of disruptive cyberattacks enabled by frontier AI,” he stated.

Schumer said he was worried about the capabilities of DHS and its Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to carry out that coordination, given federal funding cuts to the Multistate Information Sharing and Analysis Center, and the lack of a Senate-confirmed CISA director for the duration of the second Trump administration.

Schumer wants a plan from DHS by July 1 on coordinating with state and local governments on a range of questions, such as how to identify top AI talent, carry out rapid patching and conduct risk assessments.

“AI is changing the cyber battlefield fast — and we cannot let hackers get there first,” Schumer said in comments accompanying the letter. “Hospitals, power grids, water systems, schools, elections, and emergency services cannot be left exposed while criminal gangs and state-backed hackers race to exploit new AI tools. DHS must immediately help states and localities find and fix vulnerabilities before Americans are hit with outages, disruptions, and attacks that could put lives and livelihoods at risk.”

CISA is using AI to help on the defensive side internally, agency officials recently said.

The post Sen. Schumer seeks DHS plan on AI cyber coordination with state, local governments appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Trump administration is redirecting a cybersecurity scholarship program that requires recipients to work in government service toward artificial intelligence, leaving some current program scholars dismayed and bewildered.

In an email to participating school program coordinators obtained by CyberScoop, the Office of Personnel Management and National Science Foundation said the CyberCorps Scholarship For Service program would now be known as CyberAI SFS.

“The SFS students we enroll today will not be employable when they graduate in 2-3 years without significant AI background,” the email reads. “Any SFS student in this new program must be proficient in using AI in cybersecurity or providing security and resilience for AI systems. Therefore, new students in the legacy CyberCorps program must learn to acquire AI expertise to augment their cybersecurity expertise.”

“Effective immediately, new SFS scholars will not be accepted to the Legacy CyberCorps(C) program without a description on how they will develop competencies at the intersection of cybersecurity and AI,” the email continues. “The description of the competency development could include, but are not limited to, formal program of study, experimental learning, research activities, capstone projects, competitions, certifications, and/or no-credit professional development via external providers.”

One current program scholar graduating soon said they were “disappointed” by the change for several reasons. As of earlier this week, the agencies collectively running the program — OPM, NSF and the Department of Homeland Security — hadn’t notified any program participants that any changes were on the horizon.

For another: “I was a little bit surprised that it was coming out as so blatantly disregarding the people that haven’t graduated yet, that everyone in my cohort is already considered ‘legacy,’ and the fact that it said people in the program that I’m currently in will not be employable in the coming years,” they said.

The email leaves scholars uncertain about what will happen as they try to fulfill their side of the agreement, especially since doing so has  already been difficult amid cyber job cutbacks and other concerns about how the program has recently been administered. The scholar told CyberScoop there are around 300 people in this current group.

“I assume it will affect placements,” they said. “I can’t say for sure one way or another, because placements are already so impacted by everything that’s been going on. I don’t know what’s due to lack of AI background and what’s due to everything else.”

Another scholar said it was wrong for OPM “to keep claiming repeatedly that they’re acting in our best interests,” when “we’re left out to dry.” Already, the current group of scholars has been frustrated by their inability to get questions answered.

“If we’re legacy CyberCorps, then how does that address anything?” the scholar asked. “We’re just kind of being shoved into a closet and forgotten about. Now in that email, they were saying that we were going to be unhireable in two years time without all this AI stuff under our belt. But at the same time, almost all of our universities were actively discouraging the use of AI.”

Another part of the email brought welcome news to those scholars: a temporary easing of the program’s requirements, including the 70-20-10 rule that sets targets for jobs in the federal government, state and local governments, and the education sector, as well as the rules for securing an internship.. Even so, scholars say they still haven’t received any direct information about the changes.

A spokesperson for NSF said there have been some misunderstandings about the email to school program coordinators (known as principal investigators), but didn’t address current scholars’ concerns about communication.

“The guidance does not require scholars to possess these competencies upon entry,” said the spokesperson, Michael Englund. “Rather, it requires principal investigators (PIs) to clearly describe how their programs will prepare scholars to develop AI-related competencies by the time they graduate (typically within two to three years). In other words, programs must have a concrete and immediate plan to ensure scholars gain these skills during the course of their studies, not prior to admission.”

A spokesperson for OPM addressed the two biggest concerns of current participants.

“There are no changes to placement requirements,” the spokesperson said. “As noted, NSF’s updates are forward-looking to ensure future cohorts are prepared for evolving workforce needs. NSF has encouraged institutions to use professional development funds to expand AI-related training where needed. At OPM, we are also expanding AI training and have introduced AI ambassadors to support adoption.”

On communication: “Principal investigators (PIs) remain the primary point of contact for scholars, but OPM plans to increase direct outreach and plans to issue follow-up communication to scholars on placement efforts,” the spokesperson said.

Last week’s email is the latest turn for the program, with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency last month declaring that it was canceling summer internships due to the lapse in funding for some DHS agencies. Congress has since provided funding for CISA. 

The agency didn’t answer a question about whether that cancellation decision has been reversed as a result.

The post Trump officials are steering a cybersecurity scholarship program toward AI appeared first on CyberScoop.

Educational tech giant Instructure has confirmed that data was stolen in a cyberattack, with the ShinyHunters extortion gang claiming responsibility. [...]

The ShinyHunters extortion group has leaked data from 13.5 million McGraw Hill user accounts, stolen after breaching the company's Salesforce environment earlier this month. [...]

Infinite Campus, a widely used K-12 student information system, is warning customers of a data breach following an extortion attempt by a threat actor. [...]

This week we went down to Phoenix Arizona where we teamed up with the Arizona Cyber Warfare Range (AZCWR) for a great event at Grand Canyon University! Black Hills Information […]

The post Webcast World Tour: Arizona Cyber Warfare Range appeared first on Black Hills Information Security, Inc..

Sierra Ward // Last year I listened to a podcast* from Freakonomics that has stuck with me – in fact, I think it’s changed the way I think – powerful stuff […]

The post The Courage to Learn appeared first on Black Hills Information Security, Inc..

Lisa Woody // On the 23rd of December, a cyber attack left hundreds of thousands of people in the Ukrainian region of Ivano-Frankivsk without power. This was the first confirmed […]

The post Warning: This Post Contains Macros appeared first on Black Hills Information Security, Inc..