I love to read. Now that I have more time I am reading what I enjoy, that is, murder novels. I have read all of David Baldacci’s novels except his last two releases, Memory Man and The Keeper, published in later 2014 and 2015. I have also read all of Dan Brown’s and Tony Hillerman’s novels. I am now finishing up reading all of James Patterson’s novels except for the Maximum Ride series which are not murder novels, but rather novels for children and younger adults. I have read two books in this series, and I am not fond of them.
Several months ago, I wrote about my love for reading murder mystery novels. As a part of that story, I told about obtaining a public library card at my local municipal library. The library card was free and so is the access to their vast array of books. It beats spending $7.99 to $29.99 per novel for paperbacks or hardbacks.
Libraries are cool! Having worked in universities all of my live, I am accustomed to large academic libraries with an amazing collection of books, magazines and journals. And I have used university libraries all of my life. They are amazing places. One can find any and every book or periodical you can imagine. And if they don’t have it they have an inter-library loan system and can get you anything within a short period of time.
As part of my story I told you about when I entered the main entrance of the library, the first thing I noticed was a security guard right at the door. I thought nothing of it since I assumed that libraries, like any other businesses, have their share of theft and other problems that would require security. After obtaining a library card I was very excited about checking out my first book.
I also mentioned that it was my first library card since probably my college days in the 1990’s when I studied for my doctorate. What I failed to mention was it was actually my very first public library card. I had never had a public library card. Since I had gone to college right out of high school, I always had access to an academic library. And since I made a career of working in universities I had access to an academic library. So there was never a need to acquire access to a public municipal library.
As I recounted in my first story, I immediately went to the electronic card catalog to search for James Patterson novels. As I walked across the library, I was surprised to see the large number of what seemed to be homeless people. As I previously indicated, I expected to see your average Americans; students, mothers with their children, and people like me checking out books and using the other free library services. I also saw a large number of people, some of them homeless, using the public computers. Where else but in public libraries do you have free access to computers and the Internet.
In my first story, I described how I was surprised emotionally to see some many homeless people in the public library. However, having spent almost all of my entire career in public higher education, intellectually I should not have been surprised about the homeless using the library. I was used to seeing lots of homelessness in universities, especially in urban areas where there are plenty of homeless people and a number of public universities. It was not unusual to see a homeless person in the bathroom of the student union getting cleaned up. It was not unusual to see homeless people in the university library especially in the winter. I was also used to seeing homeless people panhandling on a campus as students tend to be idealistic and generous.
I related how surprised I was to see so many homeless people in the public library. I can’t believe that I was being such an intellectual snob. But I was more surprised at my initial instinct of not wanting to return to that library. How could I be such an intellectual snob given my humble beginnings? I had to adjust my view of what is the typical clientele of a public municipal library. And I did as I tossed out my intellectual snobbishness.
I also stated that on that same day, I was going to one of the local branches of the same public library. As I entered the branch public library, much to my surprise, I saw very few homeless people at this branch. Most of the people in this branch of the public library were children and their mothers and regular working class people. I also saw and still see many older adults, the white hair generation, since I continue to frequent this particular branch of the public library.
I don’t want to you leave you with the perception that I have a bias toward the homeless. I want to be clear, I am not prejudiced against homeless people. I frequent this particular branch public library not because of the small number of homeless, but because it is closer to where I live and the branch public library can get for me any book at any of the other main or branch libraries within two days. This way I don’t have to drive all over town to get my James Patterson-murder-mystery-novel fix.
Libraries are cool, they are amazing places. They even welcome the homeless. But I am still waiting for some billionaire, perhaps Warren Buffett or Bill Gates, to give a billion dollars to solve our homeless problem. However, to be honest with you, I am not holding my breath.
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Friday, April 10, 2015
The Demise of American Higher Education
Last month, the Board of Directors of Sweet Briar College made the decision to close the school. The Board identified two major factors in its decision: the “insurmountable financial challenges and years of intractable admissions problems” (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 3, 2015); and the decision to close was made in spite of the fact that the college has an $84 million dollar endowment. The college will officially close August 25, 2015 leaving approximately 300 faculty and staff without jobs. Sweet Briar is a small liberal arts, all-woman’s college.
A closer look at the problems facing Sweet Briar reveals that students today are less inclined to attend a small, rural liberal arts college and more specifically, women are not choosing to attend same sex colleges. This is evidenced by the fact that the college currently has 523 students, yet their target was 800. In 2013, the college had a $23 million deficit in its budget. Some experts suggest that this is not out of the ordinary for similar colleges relative to its total assets. However, a perplexing issue was the loss of approximately $4 million of income in 2013 on its investments compared to the previous year (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 5, 2015).
Additionally, the college’s discount rate (the amount of money the college offers in scholarships and other financial aid to enroll students) is at 62%, up from 42% in 2009, which was simply not sustainable according to the Board. The current cost of attending Sweet Briar, which includes tuition, fees, and room and board, is $47,000, according to the college’s website (http://sbc.edu/catalog/college-fees-2014-15).
In an attempt to save the college, the members of the Board examined several options such as admitting men, merging with other similar colleges, and overhauling its current educational programs. The Board members even considered spending part of the college’s endowment; however, as with most gifts to colleges, they come with restrictions. Of the $84 million in the college endowment, $56 million came with restrictions by the donors for a specific use. Moreover, the Board concluded that admitting men, which some of the other all-female colleges had done to survive, would require large amounts of time and money, which Sweet Briar did not have.
On the heels of the Sweet Briar College closure comes a new book published on March 3, 2015 entitled The End of College: Creating the Future of Learning and the University of Everywhere, by Kevin Carey (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 30, 2015). The premise of the book is that higher education as we know it today will cease to exist, except for a small handful of institutions of about 15 to 50. Today’s college will be replaced by free massive open on-line courses, or MOOCs, and the new wave of badging also known as micro-credentials.
Carey believes that a student will no long have to spend four to five or six years and thousands of dollars to receive a bachelor’s degree. Instead, a student can now take a MOOC on the internet at an accredited university free of charge and an organization will soon appear that will certify the learning that has been achieved in the course. Provided for free or at a very low cost, the certification or badges, as Carey suggests, will verify the equivalent education and training that one currently receives in a bachelor’s program. There you have it…., the end of higher education.
I would suggest that it is not quite that simple. A system such as higher education, which has been in place for approximately 1,500 years, will not come to a screeching halt that quickly. You have to keep in mind the students go to college not just to take courses and receive a degrees. Students also go to college to experience all of the extra-curricular activities such as sports, student government, student clubs, fraternities and sororities, living away from home, and a host of other out-of-classroom experiences. These experiences cannot be provided by the MOOCs.
Moreover, one of the major problems in higher education today is the high dropout rates and the low graduation rates among students. The national average for freshman to sophomore retention, also known as third semester rate, is 67.6% for all institutions of higher education, according to the American Colleges Testing Service (http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/retain_2014.pdf). One other important data point to consider is the completion or graduation rates. The national average for all institutions is 59% in six years, according to data provided by the National Center for Education Statistics. This means that colleges and universities graduate slightly over half of the students they admit during a period of six year (https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cva.asp).
A study conducted by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education analyzed the movement of a million users enrolled in MOOCs through sixteen courses offered by the university during a one year period. The researchers wanted to identify key transition points for users, such as when users entered and left courses, as well as when and how users participated in the courses. The study also considered how engagement and persistence varied based on various course characteristics.
The results of the study suggest that MOOCs have relatively few active users, that user “engagement” falls off dramatically, especially after the first two weeks of a course, and that few users persist to the end of the course. Specifically, on average, 4% of the users completed the courses and completions rates ranged from 2% to 14% depending on the course. No surprisingly, courses with lower workloads and fewer homework assignments had slightly higher course completion rates. Another interesting finding was that on average, only half of those who registered for the courses even watch the first lecture. The course with the largest enrollment had 110,000 students and the smallest had 13,000 students. Students came from countries such as the United States, India, Brazil, Britain, Canada, Russia, Spain, China, Germany, and Australia.
MOOCs are here to stay and I predict we will continue to see an increase in the use of MOOCs; however, they will not replace colleges and universities and certainly will not shut down our current system of higher education. MOOCs will certainly create more competition among colleges and universities, but this will not be the cure for the problems that exist in American higher education today.
Twenty-one colleges closed their doors in 2013, the most recent data available, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_317.50.asp?current=yes). Will we see more colleges close in the coming years? I believe we will. Just last week Harrington College of Design announced it will close its doors in 2018 for the same reasons: enrollment and revenue declines (http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/jp/harrington-college-of-design-will-close?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en). Harrington College is a small for-profit institution with an enrollment for 350 students.
Will we see the end of colleges and universities as we know them today? Not in my lifetime. However, college administrators must begin to make a paradigm shift to meet the demands of the new learner, today’s college student. Colleges must lower their costs, be more efficient and cost effective. They must do a better job of managing their endowments. A college cannot lose $4 million of income from investing its endowment and remain in business. Colleges cannot continue to do business as usual or they will not survive; case in point Sweet Briar College. Otherwise students will vote with their feet and we will see more colleges close its doors.
A closer look at the problems facing Sweet Briar reveals that students today are less inclined to attend a small, rural liberal arts college and more specifically, women are not choosing to attend same sex colleges. This is evidenced by the fact that the college currently has 523 students, yet their target was 800. In 2013, the college had a $23 million deficit in its budget. Some experts suggest that this is not out of the ordinary for similar colleges relative to its total assets. However, a perplexing issue was the loss of approximately $4 million of income in 2013 on its investments compared to the previous year (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 5, 2015).
Additionally, the college’s discount rate (the amount of money the college offers in scholarships and other financial aid to enroll students) is at 62%, up from 42% in 2009, which was simply not sustainable according to the Board. The current cost of attending Sweet Briar, which includes tuition, fees, and room and board, is $47,000, according to the college’s website (http://sbc.edu/catalog/college-fees-2014-15).
In an attempt to save the college, the members of the Board examined several options such as admitting men, merging with other similar colleges, and overhauling its current educational programs. The Board members even considered spending part of the college’s endowment; however, as with most gifts to colleges, they come with restrictions. Of the $84 million in the college endowment, $56 million came with restrictions by the donors for a specific use. Moreover, the Board concluded that admitting men, which some of the other all-female colleges had done to survive, would require large amounts of time and money, which Sweet Briar did not have.
On the heels of the Sweet Briar College closure comes a new book published on March 3, 2015 entitled The End of College: Creating the Future of Learning and the University of Everywhere, by Kevin Carey (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 30, 2015). The premise of the book is that higher education as we know it today will cease to exist, except for a small handful of institutions of about 15 to 50. Today’s college will be replaced by free massive open on-line courses, or MOOCs, and the new wave of badging also known as micro-credentials.
Carey believes that a student will no long have to spend four to five or six years and thousands of dollars to receive a bachelor’s degree. Instead, a student can now take a MOOC on the internet at an accredited university free of charge and an organization will soon appear that will certify the learning that has been achieved in the course. Provided for free or at a very low cost, the certification or badges, as Carey suggests, will verify the equivalent education and training that one currently receives in a bachelor’s program. There you have it…., the end of higher education.
I would suggest that it is not quite that simple. A system such as higher education, which has been in place for approximately 1,500 years, will not come to a screeching halt that quickly. You have to keep in mind the students go to college not just to take courses and receive a degrees. Students also go to college to experience all of the extra-curricular activities such as sports, student government, student clubs, fraternities and sororities, living away from home, and a host of other out-of-classroom experiences. These experiences cannot be provided by the MOOCs.
Moreover, one of the major problems in higher education today is the high dropout rates and the low graduation rates among students. The national average for freshman to sophomore retention, also known as third semester rate, is 67.6% for all institutions of higher education, according to the American Colleges Testing Service (http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/retain_2014.pdf). One other important data point to consider is the completion or graduation rates. The national average for all institutions is 59% in six years, according to data provided by the National Center for Education Statistics. This means that colleges and universities graduate slightly over half of the students they admit during a period of six year (https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cva.asp).
A study conducted by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education analyzed the movement of a million users enrolled in MOOCs through sixteen courses offered by the university during a one year period. The researchers wanted to identify key transition points for users, such as when users entered and left courses, as well as when and how users participated in the courses. The study also considered how engagement and persistence varied based on various course characteristics.
The results of the study suggest that MOOCs have relatively few active users, that user “engagement” falls off dramatically, especially after the first two weeks of a course, and that few users persist to the end of the course. Specifically, on average, 4% of the users completed the courses and completions rates ranged from 2% to 14% depending on the course. No surprisingly, courses with lower workloads and fewer homework assignments had slightly higher course completion rates. Another interesting finding was that on average, only half of those who registered for the courses even watch the first lecture. The course with the largest enrollment had 110,000 students and the smallest had 13,000 students. Students came from countries such as the United States, India, Brazil, Britain, Canada, Russia, Spain, China, Germany, and Australia.
MOOCs are here to stay and I predict we will continue to see an increase in the use of MOOCs; however, they will not replace colleges and universities and certainly will not shut down our current system of higher education. MOOCs will certainly create more competition among colleges and universities, but this will not be the cure for the problems that exist in American higher education today.
Twenty-one colleges closed their doors in 2013, the most recent data available, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_317.50.asp?current=yes). Will we see more colleges close in the coming years? I believe we will. Just last week Harrington College of Design announced it will close its doors in 2018 for the same reasons: enrollment and revenue declines (http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/jp/harrington-college-of-design-will-close?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en). Harrington College is a small for-profit institution with an enrollment for 350 students.
Will we see the end of colleges and universities as we know them today? Not in my lifetime. However, college administrators must begin to make a paradigm shift to meet the demands of the new learner, today’s college student. Colleges must lower their costs, be more efficient and cost effective. They must do a better job of managing their endowments. A college cannot lose $4 million of income from investing its endowment and remain in business. Colleges cannot continue to do business as usual or they will not survive; case in point Sweet Briar College. Otherwise students will vote with their feet and we will see more colleges close its doors.
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Women in Engineering and Computer Science: Why Still So Few?
The American Association of University Women (AAUW) released new research recently underlining how women continue to be underrepresented in engineering and computer science. The research also identities solutions that can help increase the number of women in these important fields (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 26, 2015).
Currently, women make up just 12% of the engineering workforce and 26% of the computing workforce. In 1990, women made up 35% of the computing workforce, a drop of 9%. Women in engineering have increased slightly by 3%, from 9% in 1990. Yet, women make up more than half of our nation’s population and 57.3% of enrollments in institutions of higher education, according to data from the National Center for Educational Statistics. In the next several years, women are projected to be well over 60% of the enrollments in colleges and universities. (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_303.10.asp).
The percentage of women who receive bachelor’s degrees in engineering increased slightly to 19.2% in 2013, up from 1% in 1970. Women earning bachelor’s degrees in computing make up only 18.2%, which is now half of what it was 30 years ago.
When you consider minority women in engineering, the picture is much more dismal. African American women make up 1% of the engineering workforce and 3% of the computing workforce, while Hispanic women hold just 1% of jobs in each field. And it is much worse for American Indian and Alaska Native women who make up only a fraction of a percent of each workforce (http://www.aauw.org/research/solving-the-equation).
So why are there so few women in engineering and computer science? The answer can be found in the gender biases and stereotypes that exist in our society. The AAUW research suggests that:
The research conducted by AAUW suggests several changes that can be made by universities and employers:
The bottom line is that we must make the necessary changes to the educational and work environments to welcome and celebrate women. We must provide females with mentoring and a supportive environment both in the university setting and in the work place. We must minimize or hopefully eliminate gender bias. We must help women understand the positive impact that they can have on society with degrees in engineering and computer science. We must provide monetary incentives in the form of scholarships for women to enter, remain, and graduate in these fields. When hiring, employers must pay women the same salaries as men for the same engineering and computing jobs. By 2022, the United States will need 1.7 million more engineers and computer scientists. Let’s make sure the women are fairly and equally represented.
Currently, women make up just 12% of the engineering workforce and 26% of the computing workforce. In 1990, women made up 35% of the computing workforce, a drop of 9%. Women in engineering have increased slightly by 3%, from 9% in 1990. Yet, women make up more than half of our nation’s population and 57.3% of enrollments in institutions of higher education, according to data from the National Center for Educational Statistics. In the next several years, women are projected to be well over 60% of the enrollments in colleges and universities. (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_303.10.asp).
The percentage of women who receive bachelor’s degrees in engineering increased slightly to 19.2% in 2013, up from 1% in 1970. Women earning bachelor’s degrees in computing make up only 18.2%, which is now half of what it was 30 years ago.
When you consider minority women in engineering, the picture is much more dismal. African American women make up 1% of the engineering workforce and 3% of the computing workforce, while Hispanic women hold just 1% of jobs in each field. And it is much worse for American Indian and Alaska Native women who make up only a fraction of a percent of each workforce (http://www.aauw.org/research/solving-the-equation).
So why are there so few women in engineering and computer science? The answer can be found in the gender biases and stereotypes that exist in our society. The AAUW research suggests that:
- Women in engineering and computing often report feelings of being isolated and unsupported.
- “Stereotype threat” - or the fear of confirming a negative stereotype about being female - has been shown to result in decreased interest and sense of belonging in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
- Women strongly value helping others, and coupled with their perceptions of engineering and computing jobs as lacking those social opportunities may turn women away.
The research conducted by AAUW suggests several changes that can be made by universities and employers:
- Introduce the idea of engineering and computing at an early age, and expose girls and boys to positive female role models in both fields.
- Encourage employers to maintain fair and consistent management practices, be aware of gender bias, and promote diversity.
- Make engineering and computing more socially relevant by emphasizing its societal benefits in college curricula and the workplace.
- Provide opportunities for female engineering and computing students to tinker and build confidence in their design and programming capabilities.
The bottom line is that we must make the necessary changes to the educational and work environments to welcome and celebrate women. We must provide females with mentoring and a supportive environment both in the university setting and in the work place. We must minimize or hopefully eliminate gender bias. We must help women understand the positive impact that they can have on society with degrees in engineering and computer science. We must provide monetary incentives in the form of scholarships for women to enter, remain, and graduate in these fields. When hiring, employers must pay women the same salaries as men for the same engineering and computing jobs. By 2022, the United States will need 1.7 million more engineers and computer scientists. Let’s make sure the women are fairly and equally represented.
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Racism on College Campuses
Can you believe it? In 2015, we are still seeing racism on college campuses. One would assume that students who attend college come from the more educated middle or upper classes and; therefore, are more open to people of other races.
That certainly is not the case at the University of Oklahoma, where a racist video surfaced last week. Members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity can be seen singing a song to the tune of “If You’re Happy and You Know It”, vowing never to have black students in their fraternity, using racial slurs like the “N” word, and talk about lynching them from a tree (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 11, 2015). This is absolutely despicable.
University of Oklahoma David Boren responded quickly by suspending the fraternity and expelled two students who lead the song once they were identified in the video. He called the students “disgraceful” and said he hoped the students would leave town, offering to buy them a one way ticket out of town. It should be noted that the national office of Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity also suspended the chapter at Oklahoma. I applaud President Boren for his fast and decisive action. In my opinion, he did the right thing.
However, President Boren’s decisions are now being called into question. Did he act too quickly without having all of the facts? Is the fraternity students’ song considered free speech? Did he deny the students who were expelled their due process rights? Legal experts are now suggesting that Boren went too far and will open the university to legal challenges.
What is typical in situations like this, once the attorneys have been consulted, is for the president to issue a very carefully worded and legalistic statement about the inappropriateness of the incident in question, state that an investigation will ensue, how students involved will be given their due process rights, and if the evidence suggests campus rules have been violated, the appropriate actions will be taken based on the student code of conduct and the student handbook, the rules and regulations for students.
Too often, our decisions as university presidents are greatly influenced by university attorneys because we don’t want to subject the university to more lawsuits. Case in point is the recent incident at the Pennsylvania State University where members of the Kappa Delta Rho fraternity posted pictures of nude and unconscious female students on a secret Facebook where only members of the fraternity had access. The Facebook page also included pictures of drug sales and hazing. In response, Penn State University President Eric Barron stated that “an investigation was underway, the university has its own judicial process for student conduct which will be followed, we want to make sure we do this right, we are committed to due process, that the right people are brought to justice, and anybody who is responsible for that type of truly offensive behavior is punished” (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/penn-state-vows-punish-those-behind-kappa-delta-rho-page-n326031). It’s clearly, a very measured response that was most likely influenced by legal counsel.
It should be noted that the female students in the pictures did not consent to having their pictures taken much less posted on a Facebook page. Officials at both Penn State and the fraternity headquarters have suspended the Kappa Delta Rho chapter.
Are Oklahoma and Penn State isolated incidences? Clearly not. The national office of Sigma Alpha Epsilon is investigating two of its other chapters for alleged displays of racism, at Louisiana Tech University and the University of Texas at Austin. The University of Washington is also investigating claims that members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity shouted racist comments at black students participating in a march protesting violence against blacks last month as they passed the fraternity’s house. The University of Maryland at College Park is investigating a racist and sexist email allegedly sent in January of 2014 by a member of the Kappa Sigma fraternity. However, it recently came to light when it was published online (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 13, 2015).
Colleges and universities across the nation should use these situations as a way to discuss racism in our country. Faculty on campuses across America should use what happened at the University of Oklahoma or other universities to teach students to explore their beliefs and be more tolerant of other races different from their own. These are typically called “teach-ins” and can be very useful to examine subjects that can be very controversial. After all, isn’t that what universities are all about? Educating and providing young men and women with information that can help them be more enlightened and become more informed members of our society, should be the mission of all universities.
Racism on college campuses will not end after the University of Oklahoma or Pennsylvania State University incidents. However, we must send the clear message that racism will not be tolerated on our college campuses. We must continue to issue appropriate punishment for these despicable acts. This won’t eliminate racism in American, but it will certainly send the message that racism has no place in higher education.
That certainly is not the case at the University of Oklahoma, where a racist video surfaced last week. Members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity can be seen singing a song to the tune of “If You’re Happy and You Know It”, vowing never to have black students in their fraternity, using racial slurs like the “N” word, and talk about lynching them from a tree (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 11, 2015). This is absolutely despicable.
University of Oklahoma David Boren responded quickly by suspending the fraternity and expelled two students who lead the song once they were identified in the video. He called the students “disgraceful” and said he hoped the students would leave town, offering to buy them a one way ticket out of town. It should be noted that the national office of Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity also suspended the chapter at Oklahoma. I applaud President Boren for his fast and decisive action. In my opinion, he did the right thing.
However, President Boren’s decisions are now being called into question. Did he act too quickly without having all of the facts? Is the fraternity students’ song considered free speech? Did he deny the students who were expelled their due process rights? Legal experts are now suggesting that Boren went too far and will open the university to legal challenges.
What is typical in situations like this, once the attorneys have been consulted, is for the president to issue a very carefully worded and legalistic statement about the inappropriateness of the incident in question, state that an investigation will ensue, how students involved will be given their due process rights, and if the evidence suggests campus rules have been violated, the appropriate actions will be taken based on the student code of conduct and the student handbook, the rules and regulations for students.
Too often, our decisions as university presidents are greatly influenced by university attorneys because we don’t want to subject the university to more lawsuits. Case in point is the recent incident at the Pennsylvania State University where members of the Kappa Delta Rho fraternity posted pictures of nude and unconscious female students on a secret Facebook where only members of the fraternity had access. The Facebook page also included pictures of drug sales and hazing. In response, Penn State University President Eric Barron stated that “an investigation was underway, the university has its own judicial process for student conduct which will be followed, we want to make sure we do this right, we are committed to due process, that the right people are brought to justice, and anybody who is responsible for that type of truly offensive behavior is punished” (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/penn-state-vows-punish-those-behind-kappa-delta-rho-page-n326031). It’s clearly, a very measured response that was most likely influenced by legal counsel.
It should be noted that the female students in the pictures did not consent to having their pictures taken much less posted on a Facebook page. Officials at both Penn State and the fraternity headquarters have suspended the Kappa Delta Rho chapter.
Are Oklahoma and Penn State isolated incidences? Clearly not. The national office of Sigma Alpha Epsilon is investigating two of its other chapters for alleged displays of racism, at Louisiana Tech University and the University of Texas at Austin. The University of Washington is also investigating claims that members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity shouted racist comments at black students participating in a march protesting violence against blacks last month as they passed the fraternity’s house. The University of Maryland at College Park is investigating a racist and sexist email allegedly sent in January of 2014 by a member of the Kappa Sigma fraternity. However, it recently came to light when it was published online (Chronicle of Higher Education, March 13, 2015).
Colleges and universities across the nation should use these situations as a way to discuss racism in our country. Faculty on campuses across America should use what happened at the University of Oklahoma or other universities to teach students to explore their beliefs and be more tolerant of other races different from their own. These are typically called “teach-ins” and can be very useful to examine subjects that can be very controversial. After all, isn’t that what universities are all about? Educating and providing young men and women with information that can help them be more enlightened and become more informed members of our society, should be the mission of all universities.
Racism on college campuses will not end after the University of Oklahoma or Pennsylvania State University incidents. However, we must send the clear message that racism will not be tolerated on our college campuses. We must continue to issue appropriate punishment for these despicable acts. This won’t eliminate racism in American, but it will certainly send the message that racism has no place in higher education.
Monday, March 9, 2015
Increasing Graduation Rates at Community Colleges
Last week, MDRC released a report on the evaluation of the Accelerated Study in Associate Programs or ASAP as it is known. The program nearly doubled the three-year graduation rates of community college students who started in remedial classes. This is impressive given that graduation rates of community college students are extremely low. According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, only 20% of the students who enter public community colleges complete a certificate or associate degree in three years (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cva.asp).
ASAP is a comprehensive, long-term program designed to increase the success and ultimately the graduation rates of community college students. The Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC), was created in 1974 by the Ford Foundation and a group of federal agencies. It is a nonprofit, nonpartisan education and social policy research organization dedicated to learning what works to improve programs and policies that affect the poor (http://www.mdrc.org/about/about-mdrc-history).
ASAP was created by the City University of New York (CUNY) system office and implemented in 2007 with funding from the New York City Center for Economic Opportunity at Borough of Manhattan Community College, Kingsborough Community College, and LaGuardia Community College. In 2009 CUNY system leaders approached MDRC about evaluating the program and they accepted.
The program has four major components that provide structure and support for up to three years and is designed to address multiple potential barriers to student success in community colleges. First, the program requires students to attend college full-time, are encouraged to take developmental courses early, and to graduate within three years. This is important because it sets high standards by issuing requirements, and it sends the right message about getting done on time if not earlier. Second, it has a student services component, which requires students to receive comprehensive advisement from an ASAP-dedicated adviser with a small caseload. Students also receive career information from an ASAP-dedicated career and employment services staff member, and extensive tutoring from ASAP-dedicated staff. The third component requires students to enroll in blocked or linked courses in their first year. The blocked courses consist of two or more courses grouped together with seats reserved for ASAP students. Students are also required to enroll in an ASAP seminar during their first few semesters covering topics such as setting goals and study skills. The fourth has a financial support component where students receive a tuition waiver that covers any gaps between financial aid and college tuition and fees. Students also receive free MetroCards for use on public transportation, contingent on participation in key program services, and free use of textbooks.
According to the report, the ASAP program costs $16,300 per student, which is 63% more than what CUNY spent per student on usual college services. The report goes on to assert that the cost was actually lower because ASAP generated so many more graduates over the three-year follow-up period than did the usual college services.
In the study, MDRC used a random assignment research design to evaluate the impact of ASAP intervention strategies on students’ academic outcomes over a three-year study period compared to students who received the usual services and courses at the colleges. The study targeted students who met the following eligibility criteria at the point of random assignment: had family income below 200% of the federal poverty level or were eligible for a Pell Grant (or both); needed one or two developmental courses to build math, reading, or writing skills; had previously earned 12 credits or fewer; were New York City residents; were willing to attend college full time; and were in an ASAP eligible major (http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/doubling_graduation_rates_es.pdf). Eligible students who agreed to participate were randomly assigned to either the program group (typically called the experimental group), students who had the opportunity to receive the intervention strategies or services offered by ASAP, or to the control group, students who received the usual college services with no intervention strategies or special services.
The sample consisted of 896 students who completed a Baseline Information Form (BIF) to determine if they met the eligibility criteria listed above. Roughly two-thirds of the students in the research sample were women and most were relatively young. Seventy-seven percent (77%) were 22 years of age or younger when they entered the study. The study sample was racially diverse and reflected the collective student body at the three community colleges, which no racial majority. The majority of students sampled lived with their parents, were unmarried, and did not have children.
The results of the study suggest that 40% of students in the ASAP program graduated in three years compared to 22% in the control group or those students receiving no intervention strategies. Additionally, ASAP students completed an average of 48 credit hours compared to 39 credit hours by the control group. Finally, 25% of the ASAP students enrolled in a four-year university compared to 17% in the control group.
A detailed, in depth analysis of the services offered by ASAP provides revealing information that could explain why students in the program were found to be more successful. ASAP students were required to enroll full-time, take remedial courses early, and strongly encouraged to graduate in three years. ASAP students were advised by an academic advisor with a student-advisor load of 60:1 or 80:1, 95% of these students met on average 38 times with their advisors in the first year. Compared to non-ASAP students who had advisors with a student-advisor load of 600:1 and 1500:1, 80% of those students met on average six times. With regard to tutoring, 74% of ASAP students received tutoring outside of class and met with a tutor an average of 24 times during first year. Compared to non-ASAP, 39% of those students who received tutoring outside of class and met with a tutor an average of seven times in the same period. Eighty percent (80%) of ASAP students met on average of nine times with career and employment services staff during the first year compared to 29% of non-ASAP students who met on average two times with career and employment services staff during first year
While blocked or linked courses were offered to ASAP students, few took a complete block of courses; however, most of these students took an ASAP seminar course for three semesters compared to non-ASAP students whose block course enrollment was not tracked and some of these students took a freshman seminar or student success course in their first year. Finally, 3% to 11% of the ASAP students received tuition waivers, all ASAP students received free MetroCards for use on public transportation, contingent upon participating in ASAP and all ASAP student received free use of textbooks. None of these services were provided to non-ASAP students.
Two-tailed t-tests were conducted on the percent of ASAP students enrolled each semester over the three-year period compared to non-ASAP student enrollments and the differences were statistically significant in the first two years, but not in the third year. This is essentially a statistical test to determine if there is a statistically significant difference between the experimental group (ASAP students) versus the control group (non-ASAP students) T-tests were also conducted on the differences between the percent of students who graduated in the ASAP group versus the non-ASAP group, credit hours earned between the two groups, and the percent of student who went on to a four-year college after three years in the community college and each was highly statistically significant. However, recall that two-thirds of the students in the sample were women, which could account for a higher success rates. Numerous research studies, including my own research, have demonstrated that women tend to do better in college than men. Also, additional higher order statistical analyses such as predictive statistics, like regression analysis, were not employed. It would have been informative to understand, via regression analysis, if there is a casual relationship between the intervention strategies and student outcomes. In other words, did the ASAP services cause students to be more successful in the community colleges? However, it should be pointed out that social science research is not perfect.
It makes sense that with this much attention paid and the large number of support services offered to ASAP students, it is only logical that these students would do better and thus succeed at higher rates compared to typical community college students. My own experiences in developing student recruitment and retention programs, provides further evidence that programs which offer these many services and pay this much attention to students do, in fact, increase student success. Early in my career, I developed a student support program with many of the same intervention strategies offered in the ASAP program and other strategies such as shadow courses. I didn’t include blocked courses initially; although, in later programs I developed and did experiment with blocked courses. I offered scholarships from money I had raised and used it with other forms of financial aid to provide a free college education to the participants. However, participants had to participate in all of the services offered by the program in order to receive the scholarship. Students were monitored weekly and scholarship money was distributed monthly, based on participation in the program. Student success in the program increased dramatically.
These results are also consistent with the prevailing theory on college student retention. In 1975, Dr. Vincent Tinto posited the landmark theory of student integration, commonly known as the student integration model. Dr. Tinto’s theory of student integration was the basis for thousands of studies and became the most widely studied and empirically tested theory in higher education. While these studies attacked and supported the student integration model, over time Dr. Tinto revised his theory several times. Essentially, Dr. Tinto theorized that if college students integrate academically and socially they will tend to stay in college, be successful and graduate. Conversely, if students don’t “connect” academically and socially with the college or university they tend to drop out.
According to the Chronicle of Higher Education (February 26, 2015), ASAP has gained nationwide attention. Donna Linderman, who oversees the ASAP program at CUNY, said her office had been "bombarded with requests for information from all over the country." The good news is that CUNY and MDRC are working to replicate the program in other parts of the country, starting with three two-year colleges in Ohio. All states should take heed and provide the money to replicate this program in a small sample of community colleges. If the program works, then it should be implemented at all community colleges. Nearly half of all college students are enrolled in community colleges, 50% are Hispanic, 31% are African American and 44% are low-income, according to the Community College Research Center (http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Community-College-FAQs.html). Imagine the positive impact that doubling the graduation rates of community college students would have on our country and the impact it would have on the lives of minority, low-income community college students.
ASAP is a comprehensive, long-term program designed to increase the success and ultimately the graduation rates of community college students. The Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC), was created in 1974 by the Ford Foundation and a group of federal agencies. It is a nonprofit, nonpartisan education and social policy research organization dedicated to learning what works to improve programs and policies that affect the poor (http://www.mdrc.org/about/about-mdrc-history).
ASAP was created by the City University of New York (CUNY) system office and implemented in 2007 with funding from the New York City Center for Economic Opportunity at Borough of Manhattan Community College, Kingsborough Community College, and LaGuardia Community College. In 2009 CUNY system leaders approached MDRC about evaluating the program and they accepted.
The program has four major components that provide structure and support for up to three years and is designed to address multiple potential barriers to student success in community colleges. First, the program requires students to attend college full-time, are encouraged to take developmental courses early, and to graduate within three years. This is important because it sets high standards by issuing requirements, and it sends the right message about getting done on time if not earlier. Second, it has a student services component, which requires students to receive comprehensive advisement from an ASAP-dedicated adviser with a small caseload. Students also receive career information from an ASAP-dedicated career and employment services staff member, and extensive tutoring from ASAP-dedicated staff. The third component requires students to enroll in blocked or linked courses in their first year. The blocked courses consist of two or more courses grouped together with seats reserved for ASAP students. Students are also required to enroll in an ASAP seminar during their first few semesters covering topics such as setting goals and study skills. The fourth has a financial support component where students receive a tuition waiver that covers any gaps between financial aid and college tuition and fees. Students also receive free MetroCards for use on public transportation, contingent on participation in key program services, and free use of textbooks.
According to the report, the ASAP program costs $16,300 per student, which is 63% more than what CUNY spent per student on usual college services. The report goes on to assert that the cost was actually lower because ASAP generated so many more graduates over the three-year follow-up period than did the usual college services.
In the study, MDRC used a random assignment research design to evaluate the impact of ASAP intervention strategies on students’ academic outcomes over a three-year study period compared to students who received the usual services and courses at the colleges. The study targeted students who met the following eligibility criteria at the point of random assignment: had family income below 200% of the federal poverty level or were eligible for a Pell Grant (or both); needed one or two developmental courses to build math, reading, or writing skills; had previously earned 12 credits or fewer; were New York City residents; were willing to attend college full time; and were in an ASAP eligible major (http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/doubling_graduation_rates_es.pdf). Eligible students who agreed to participate were randomly assigned to either the program group (typically called the experimental group), students who had the opportunity to receive the intervention strategies or services offered by ASAP, or to the control group, students who received the usual college services with no intervention strategies or special services.
The sample consisted of 896 students who completed a Baseline Information Form (BIF) to determine if they met the eligibility criteria listed above. Roughly two-thirds of the students in the research sample were women and most were relatively young. Seventy-seven percent (77%) were 22 years of age or younger when they entered the study. The study sample was racially diverse and reflected the collective student body at the three community colleges, which no racial majority. The majority of students sampled lived with their parents, were unmarried, and did not have children.
The results of the study suggest that 40% of students in the ASAP program graduated in three years compared to 22% in the control group or those students receiving no intervention strategies. Additionally, ASAP students completed an average of 48 credit hours compared to 39 credit hours by the control group. Finally, 25% of the ASAP students enrolled in a four-year university compared to 17% in the control group.
A detailed, in depth analysis of the services offered by ASAP provides revealing information that could explain why students in the program were found to be more successful. ASAP students were required to enroll full-time, take remedial courses early, and strongly encouraged to graduate in three years. ASAP students were advised by an academic advisor with a student-advisor load of 60:1 or 80:1, 95% of these students met on average 38 times with their advisors in the first year. Compared to non-ASAP students who had advisors with a student-advisor load of 600:1 and 1500:1, 80% of those students met on average six times. With regard to tutoring, 74% of ASAP students received tutoring outside of class and met with a tutor an average of 24 times during first year. Compared to non-ASAP, 39% of those students who received tutoring outside of class and met with a tutor an average of seven times in the same period. Eighty percent (80%) of ASAP students met on average of nine times with career and employment services staff during the first year compared to 29% of non-ASAP students who met on average two times with career and employment services staff during first year
While blocked or linked courses were offered to ASAP students, few took a complete block of courses; however, most of these students took an ASAP seminar course for three semesters compared to non-ASAP students whose block course enrollment was not tracked and some of these students took a freshman seminar or student success course in their first year. Finally, 3% to 11% of the ASAP students received tuition waivers, all ASAP students received free MetroCards for use on public transportation, contingent upon participating in ASAP and all ASAP student received free use of textbooks. None of these services were provided to non-ASAP students.
Two-tailed t-tests were conducted on the percent of ASAP students enrolled each semester over the three-year period compared to non-ASAP student enrollments and the differences were statistically significant in the first two years, but not in the third year. This is essentially a statistical test to determine if there is a statistically significant difference between the experimental group (ASAP students) versus the control group (non-ASAP students) T-tests were also conducted on the differences between the percent of students who graduated in the ASAP group versus the non-ASAP group, credit hours earned between the two groups, and the percent of student who went on to a four-year college after three years in the community college and each was highly statistically significant. However, recall that two-thirds of the students in the sample were women, which could account for a higher success rates. Numerous research studies, including my own research, have demonstrated that women tend to do better in college than men. Also, additional higher order statistical analyses such as predictive statistics, like regression analysis, were not employed. It would have been informative to understand, via regression analysis, if there is a casual relationship between the intervention strategies and student outcomes. In other words, did the ASAP services cause students to be more successful in the community colleges? However, it should be pointed out that social science research is not perfect.
It makes sense that with this much attention paid and the large number of support services offered to ASAP students, it is only logical that these students would do better and thus succeed at higher rates compared to typical community college students. My own experiences in developing student recruitment and retention programs, provides further evidence that programs which offer these many services and pay this much attention to students do, in fact, increase student success. Early in my career, I developed a student support program with many of the same intervention strategies offered in the ASAP program and other strategies such as shadow courses. I didn’t include blocked courses initially; although, in later programs I developed and did experiment with blocked courses. I offered scholarships from money I had raised and used it with other forms of financial aid to provide a free college education to the participants. However, participants had to participate in all of the services offered by the program in order to receive the scholarship. Students were monitored weekly and scholarship money was distributed monthly, based on participation in the program. Student success in the program increased dramatically.
These results are also consistent with the prevailing theory on college student retention. In 1975, Dr. Vincent Tinto posited the landmark theory of student integration, commonly known as the student integration model. Dr. Tinto’s theory of student integration was the basis for thousands of studies and became the most widely studied and empirically tested theory in higher education. While these studies attacked and supported the student integration model, over time Dr. Tinto revised his theory several times. Essentially, Dr. Tinto theorized that if college students integrate academically and socially they will tend to stay in college, be successful and graduate. Conversely, if students don’t “connect” academically and socially with the college or university they tend to drop out.
According to the Chronicle of Higher Education (February 26, 2015), ASAP has gained nationwide attention. Donna Linderman, who oversees the ASAP program at CUNY, said her office had been "bombarded with requests for information from all over the country." The good news is that CUNY and MDRC are working to replicate the program in other parts of the country, starting with three two-year colleges in Ohio. All states should take heed and provide the money to replicate this program in a small sample of community colleges. If the program works, then it should be implemented at all community colleges. Nearly half of all college students are enrolled in community colleges, 50% are Hispanic, 31% are African American and 44% are low-income, according to the Community College Research Center (http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Community-College-FAQs.html). Imagine the positive impact that doubling the graduation rates of community college students would have on our country and the impact it would have on the lives of minority, low-income community college students.
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Sexual Assaults and Concealed Handguns on College Campuses
Last year, I wrote several times about sexual assaults on college campuses. It is a hideous crime that should not be tolerated in our society. It is surprising and shocking that more colleges and universities are not doing enough to minimize or hopefully stop sexual assaults on campuses across the country.
Gun rights advocates such as Women for Concealed Carry or Students for Concealed Carry are capitalizing on this fear and are pushing legislators in many states to pass laws that would allow students to carry concealed handguns on campuses. Their premise is that if a college student was allowed to carry a concealed handgun on campus, fewer sexual assaults would occur as the student carrying a handgun would be readily able to defend herself.
But first, let’s look at some facts. Currently three states; Colorado, Idaho, and Utah; have enacted laws which allow anyone to carry concealed handguns on campus. Five other states; Arkansas, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, and Wisconsin; have laws allowing concealed handguns on campuses, but the laws in those states permit the colleges or universities to restrict where the weapons may be carried (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015). And as you can imagine, none of the college or university administrators in these five states have allowed concealed handguns to be carried on their campuses. Additionally, nine other states allow guns on campuses, but only in locked cars in parking lots.
Gun rights advocates are using sexual assaults on campuses to push for concealed handgun carry laws to be passed by legislatures in many states. They claim that if women on college campuses were armed fewer rapes would occur. In fact, legislators in ten states; Florida, Indiana, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming, are hoping that this argument will help them get concealed carry laws passed in their states (New York Times, February 18, 2015).
One such bill is being considered by Nevada legislators. Nevada Assemblywoman, Michele Fiore, Republican and sponsor of the bill said in a telephone interview: “If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them. The sexual assaults that are occurring would go down once these sexual predators get a bullet in their head.” (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015) Assemblywoman Fiore is garnering lots of attention, both for and against, for her comments. Ms. Fiore points to the rape of Amanda Collins by a stranger on the campus of the University of Nevada, Reno in 2007. Ms. Collins has testified before state legislatures in Nevada and other states advocating the right to carry a concealed handgun on campus. She has claimed that had she been carrying a handgun that night, there is no doubt in her mind that she could have stopped the attacker.
Let’s consider some additional facts. Most sexual assaults on college campuses are not done by strangers. In fact:
• Ninety (90) percent of the sexual assault victims knew the perpetrator,
• Eighty-four (84) percent of the perpetrators were students,
• Seventy-eight (78) percent of the assaults involved alcohol, and one in three victims were drunk, passed out, or asleep.
• Nearly three-fourths of the victims in the campus sexual assaults were attacked in their freshman or sophomore year.
The data were gathered by United Educators, an insurance and risk-management firm, which examined 305 claims from 104 colleges it insures involving alleged sexual assaults of students from 2011 through 2013 (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015).
In another study conducted by Christopher P. Krebs, senior researcher at RTI International, a nonprofit research group, 5,446 undergraduate women were surveyed at two large public universities. He found that women on a campus were typically assaulted by a trusted male friend while both were under the influence of alcohol, drugs or both and not by a stranger while walking across the campus. Mr. Krebs states that this is not a situation in which a woman would likely have easy access to a pistol or to summon much will or capacity to use one.
Another interesting fact to consider is that federal law prohibits the ownership of handguns by anyone under the age of 21. This means that a very large percentage of undergraduate students on college campuses would not be allowed to own a handgun. Given this and the fact that nearly three-fourths of the sexual assault victims on campus are freshmen or sophomores, passing a concealed handgun carry law would not help the vast majority of these sexual assault victims.
One interesting note to point out is that a spokesman for the advocacy group Students for Concealed Carry, Michael Newbern, said he was not aware of any case of a student who had used a concealed handgun to prevent a campus sexual assault. However, it should be noted that assessing the impact of concealed handgun carry laws on college campuses is difficult as these regulations are relatively new.
As a former president of a university, I have spoken to many university presidents, other administrators, faculty, and police officers about this issue. And not a single one has been in favor of allowing students, faculty, staff or the general public to carry concealed handguns on their campus. Handguns do NOT belong on a college campus. I have discussed this matter many times with campus, city, and state police officers and sheriff’s deputies and again not a single one have been in favor of allowing people to carry concealed handguns on college campuses. Police officers have told me that when confronted with two or more people with firearms they are trained to immediately take control of the situation by disarming by any means. Police officers when faced with two people pointing pistols at each other or, more importantly, shooting at each other will not stop to ask who the person is with the concealed handgun carry permit and who is the bad guy. They will control the situation by neutralizing the people carrying the handguns and if that involves having to shoot, they will do so to protect their own lives and those of their fellow police officers.
Finally, one good bit of news is that the military academies; the U.S. Air Force Academy, the U.S. Military Academy, and the U.S. Naval Academy; recently reported a drop in sexual assaults. In 2013-2014, 61 sexual assaults were reported compared to 70 the previous year. However, in the report released by the Pentagon, 40 percent of those students who reported sexual assaults also complained that they had faced retaliation for reporting the incidents (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 11, 2015).
Students on college campuses are going to experiment with alcohol and drugs. However, a college campus is certainly not a place where students should mix alcohol, drugs, and handguns. And state legislators should not give licenses to students to indulge in such a mix.
Gun rights advocates such as Women for Concealed Carry or Students for Concealed Carry are capitalizing on this fear and are pushing legislators in many states to pass laws that would allow students to carry concealed handguns on campuses. Their premise is that if a college student was allowed to carry a concealed handgun on campus, fewer sexual assaults would occur as the student carrying a handgun would be readily able to defend herself.
But first, let’s look at some facts. Currently three states; Colorado, Idaho, and Utah; have enacted laws which allow anyone to carry concealed handguns on campus. Five other states; Arkansas, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, and Wisconsin; have laws allowing concealed handguns on campuses, but the laws in those states permit the colleges or universities to restrict where the weapons may be carried (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015). And as you can imagine, none of the college or university administrators in these five states have allowed concealed handguns to be carried on their campuses. Additionally, nine other states allow guns on campuses, but only in locked cars in parking lots.
Gun rights advocates are using sexual assaults on campuses to push for concealed handgun carry laws to be passed by legislatures in many states. They claim that if women on college campuses were armed fewer rapes would occur. In fact, legislators in ten states; Florida, Indiana, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming, are hoping that this argument will help them get concealed carry laws passed in their states (New York Times, February 18, 2015).
One such bill is being considered by Nevada legislators. Nevada Assemblywoman, Michele Fiore, Republican and sponsor of the bill said in a telephone interview: “If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them. The sexual assaults that are occurring would go down once these sexual predators get a bullet in their head.” (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015) Assemblywoman Fiore is garnering lots of attention, both for and against, for her comments. Ms. Fiore points to the rape of Amanda Collins by a stranger on the campus of the University of Nevada, Reno in 2007. Ms. Collins has testified before state legislatures in Nevada and other states advocating the right to carry a concealed handgun on campus. She has claimed that had she been carrying a handgun that night, there is no doubt in her mind that she could have stopped the attacker.
Let’s consider some additional facts. Most sexual assaults on college campuses are not done by strangers. In fact:
• Ninety (90) percent of the sexual assault victims knew the perpetrator,
• Eighty-four (84) percent of the perpetrators were students,
• Seventy-eight (78) percent of the assaults involved alcohol, and one in three victims were drunk, passed out, or asleep.
• Nearly three-fourths of the victims in the campus sexual assaults were attacked in their freshman or sophomore year.
The data were gathered by United Educators, an insurance and risk-management firm, which examined 305 claims from 104 colleges it insures involving alleged sexual assaults of students from 2011 through 2013 (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015).
In another study conducted by Christopher P. Krebs, senior researcher at RTI International, a nonprofit research group, 5,446 undergraduate women were surveyed at two large public universities. He found that women on a campus were typically assaulted by a trusted male friend while both were under the influence of alcohol, drugs or both and not by a stranger while walking across the campus. Mr. Krebs states that this is not a situation in which a woman would likely have easy access to a pistol or to summon much will or capacity to use one.
Another interesting fact to consider is that federal law prohibits the ownership of handguns by anyone under the age of 21. This means that a very large percentage of undergraduate students on college campuses would not be allowed to own a handgun. Given this and the fact that nearly three-fourths of the sexual assault victims on campus are freshmen or sophomores, passing a concealed handgun carry law would not help the vast majority of these sexual assault victims.
One interesting note to point out is that a spokesman for the advocacy group Students for Concealed Carry, Michael Newbern, said he was not aware of any case of a student who had used a concealed handgun to prevent a campus sexual assault. However, it should be noted that assessing the impact of concealed handgun carry laws on college campuses is difficult as these regulations are relatively new.
As a former president of a university, I have spoken to many university presidents, other administrators, faculty, and police officers about this issue. And not a single one has been in favor of allowing students, faculty, staff or the general public to carry concealed handguns on their campus. Handguns do NOT belong on a college campus. I have discussed this matter many times with campus, city, and state police officers and sheriff’s deputies and again not a single one have been in favor of allowing people to carry concealed handguns on college campuses. Police officers have told me that when confronted with two or more people with firearms they are trained to immediately take control of the situation by disarming by any means. Police officers when faced with two people pointing pistols at each other or, more importantly, shooting at each other will not stop to ask who the person is with the concealed handgun carry permit and who is the bad guy. They will control the situation by neutralizing the people carrying the handguns and if that involves having to shoot, they will do so to protect their own lives and those of their fellow police officers.
Finally, one good bit of news is that the military academies; the U.S. Air Force Academy, the U.S. Military Academy, and the U.S. Naval Academy; recently reported a drop in sexual assaults. In 2013-2014, 61 sexual assaults were reported compared to 70 the previous year. However, in the report released by the Pentagon, 40 percent of those students who reported sexual assaults also complained that they had faced retaliation for reporting the incidents (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 11, 2015).
Students on college campuses are going to experiment with alcohol and drugs. However, a college campus is certainly not a place where students should mix alcohol, drugs, and handguns. And state legislators should not give licenses to students to indulge in such a mix.
Monday, February 23, 2015
Public Library and the Homeless
I love to read. But until recently, most of what I read was work related materials; letters, reports; memoranda, research papers, dissertations, etc. and not pleasure reading. I especially like to read murder mystery novels. I like to pick one author and read all of his or her books. I have read all of David Baldacci’s novels. If you haven’t read Baldacci, it’s a must read. His novels are hard to put down. I have also read all of Dan Brown’s and Tony Hillerman’s novels.
Now that I have more time, I am pouring over James Patterson’s novels. I have read all of this Detective Alex Cross books, except his latest book just published Hope to Die. I have read nearly all of his books about Private, novels about a private investigative firm and NYPD Red, novels about an elite New York Police unit. I have also read nearly all of the I, Michael Bennett books. I am now reading through his novels about the Women’s Murder Club, there are thirteen in total and I am on number 9, 9th Judgement. Patterson Women’s Murder Club series starts with 1st to Die and, at last count, Unlucky 13. However, number 14, 14th Deadly Sin, is scheduled to be released in May of this year.
You are probably wondering why I am writing about my interest in reading murder mystery novels. Recently, I decided to acquire a public library card at my local municipal library instead of continuing to pay $7.99 per novel, if you can find them on sale, to as much as $29.99 for hardbacks, which I never buy. It is free and it allows me access to all of the Patterson murder mystery novels and other books that I want to read.
When I entered the main entrance of the library, the first thing I noticed was a security guard right at the door. I thought nothing of it since I presume that libraries, like any other businesses have their share of theft and other problems that would require security. After completing a simple application for a library card and providing proof, a driver’s license, of who I am and that I actually reside in the municipality where the library was located, I was given a library card.
It is my first library card since who knows when, probably my college days in the 1990’s when I studied for my doctorate. I immediately went to the electronic card catalog to search for James Patterson novels. As I walked across the library, I was surprised to see the large number of what seemed to be homeless people in the library. I guess I expected to see your average Americans; students, mothers with their children, and people like me checking out books and using the other free library services. As I think about it now, I should not be surprised about the homeless people in the library as I presume they like to read too.
And having spent almost my entire career in public higher education, I also should not be surprised about the homeless being in the library. I am used to seeing lots of homelessness in universities, especially in urban areas where there are plenty of homeless people and a number of public universities. It is not unusual to see a homeless person in the bathroom of the student union getting cleaned up. It’s not unusual to see homeless people in the university library especially in the winter. Libraries, after all, are nice, warm places where you don’t get asked to leave unless you are causing trouble. It’s not unusual to see the homeless people panhandling on a campus as students tend to be idealistic and generous, and thus tend to give money more readily to a homeless person.
I have always been surprised by college students’ generosity toward the homeless since many college students are typically on a pretty tight budget and can ill afford to give away money to a homeless. But, I assume since college students tend to be young, idealistic, and altruistic, they tend to be generous.
Homelessness is a major problem in our country. What really makes me sad to see is homeless children and their parents. It is too bad I can’t wave a magic wand and solve the problem. Or better yet, why can’t some billionaire, perhaps Bill Gates, give a billion dollars to solve our homeless problem.
So again, I should not be surprised to see homeless people in the public municipal library, but to be honest, I was very surprised. So much so that my initial instinct was to not return to that library. I have to adjust my view of what is the typical clientele of a public municipal library. By the way, I have returned to that public municipal library again, in fact many times. Today, I will actually go to one of the branches of this public municipal library as the Patterson book I am looking for is not at the library I frequent, which by the way, is the main library. Consequently, this time I will not be surprised if I see homeless people at the branch of municipal library.
Now that I have more time, I am pouring over James Patterson’s novels. I have read all of this Detective Alex Cross books, except his latest book just published Hope to Die. I have read nearly all of his books about Private, novels about a private investigative firm and NYPD Red, novels about an elite New York Police unit. I have also read nearly all of the I, Michael Bennett books. I am now reading through his novels about the Women’s Murder Club, there are thirteen in total and I am on number 9, 9th Judgement. Patterson Women’s Murder Club series starts with 1st to Die and, at last count, Unlucky 13. However, number 14, 14th Deadly Sin, is scheduled to be released in May of this year.
You are probably wondering why I am writing about my interest in reading murder mystery novels. Recently, I decided to acquire a public library card at my local municipal library instead of continuing to pay $7.99 per novel, if you can find them on sale, to as much as $29.99 for hardbacks, which I never buy. It is free and it allows me access to all of the Patterson murder mystery novels and other books that I want to read.
When I entered the main entrance of the library, the first thing I noticed was a security guard right at the door. I thought nothing of it since I presume that libraries, like any other businesses have their share of theft and other problems that would require security. After completing a simple application for a library card and providing proof, a driver’s license, of who I am and that I actually reside in the municipality where the library was located, I was given a library card.
It is my first library card since who knows when, probably my college days in the 1990’s when I studied for my doctorate. I immediately went to the electronic card catalog to search for James Patterson novels. As I walked across the library, I was surprised to see the large number of what seemed to be homeless people in the library. I guess I expected to see your average Americans; students, mothers with their children, and people like me checking out books and using the other free library services. As I think about it now, I should not be surprised about the homeless people in the library as I presume they like to read too.
And having spent almost my entire career in public higher education, I also should not be surprised about the homeless being in the library. I am used to seeing lots of homelessness in universities, especially in urban areas where there are plenty of homeless people and a number of public universities. It is not unusual to see a homeless person in the bathroom of the student union getting cleaned up. It’s not unusual to see homeless people in the university library especially in the winter. Libraries, after all, are nice, warm places where you don’t get asked to leave unless you are causing trouble. It’s not unusual to see the homeless people panhandling on a campus as students tend to be idealistic and generous, and thus tend to give money more readily to a homeless person.
I have always been surprised by college students’ generosity toward the homeless since many college students are typically on a pretty tight budget and can ill afford to give away money to a homeless. But, I assume since college students tend to be young, idealistic, and altruistic, they tend to be generous.
Homelessness is a major problem in our country. What really makes me sad to see is homeless children and their parents. It is too bad I can’t wave a magic wand and solve the problem. Or better yet, why can’t some billionaire, perhaps Bill Gates, give a billion dollars to solve our homeless problem.
So again, I should not be surprised to see homeless people in the public municipal library, but to be honest, I was very surprised. So much so that my initial instinct was to not return to that library. I have to adjust my view of what is the typical clientele of a public municipal library. By the way, I have returned to that public municipal library again, in fact many times. Today, I will actually go to one of the branches of this public municipal library as the Patterson book I am looking for is not at the library I frequent, which by the way, is the main library. Consequently, this time I will not be surprised if I see homeless people at the branch of municipal library.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)