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.
Showing posts with label higher education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label higher education. Show all posts
Friday, April 10, 2015
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.
Friday, January 23, 2015
A New Way to Rate Colleges and Universities President Obama’s College-Ratings Plan
Last month the Obama Administration unveiled its long-awaited and much-criticized plan to rate colleges and universities. While the overall intent is admirable, the details are causing much consternation among college and university administrators and trade union representatives. However, students, consumer groups and critics of higher education have applauded the Obama Administration for proposing the new college-ratings system.
The idea for the plan was first announced by President Obama in his State of the Union address three years ago. He put colleges and universities on notice stating that his administration would not continue to subsidize rising tuition costs. A year later, in an August of 2013 speech at the University of Buffalo, as part of a three-campus tour, he denounced the high cost of a college education and promoted his plans to make colleges more affordable. The initial plan, or proposal as it was called, was to rate colleges based on measures of access, affordability and student outcomes, and to allocate federal aid based on those ratings. Thus for example, students attending higher-rated institutions could obtain larger Pell Grants and more affordable loans.
As part of the plan, the U.S. Department of Education announced a series of forums that were be held to discuss the plan and gather feedback on the new ratings system. At each of the forums, criticism was abound about the pitfalls of a one-size-fits-all system of rating colleges. Concerns were raised about a large number of issues: the diverse nature of colleges and universities; how to account for the differences in institutions’ missions and profiles; how retention and graduation rates, employment and continuing-education rates, and loan-repayment and default rates will be used. Other concerns included the data collected by the U.S. Department of Education is deeply flawed; would the new ratings system discourage colleges and universities from enrolling minority and low-income students since they tend to have low success rates; and finally, it will be impossible to please everyone. One national organization of university administrators proposed a simple system of rating colleges based on "social responsibility" by assigning a silver, gold or platinum rating.
The Obama Administration’s new plan has proposed looking at measures such as a college’s average net price, its students’ completion rates, the percentage of its students receiving Pell Grants, labor-market outcomes, and loan-repayment (or rather loan-default) rates. The last two metrics were very controversial during the lengthy fight over the "gainful employment" rule, which was released at the end of last year.
However, the new plan has been condemned more for what it didn’t include than for what measure were included. For example, critics denounce the plan because it doesn’t assign weights to each metric nor does it offer a plan for how similar institutions will be grouped. It also doesn’t provide a specific format for the ratings and it doesn’t clarify whether the department will publish a single, composite rating, or a series of ratings.
University administrators have expressed concern that the plan will punish colleges and universities that serve low-income students and those that prepare graduates for much-needed but low-paying professions. The worry is that a rating system that doesn’t adjust for student demographics and institutional mission, could force colleges to turn away at-risk students, perhaps relax their graduation standards, or even drop degrees in low-paying fields in order to receive higher ratings in the new system.
Additional criticism has focused on how federal data is collected and reported. Specifically, the U.S. Department of Education considers only first-time, full-time students in calculating graduation rates. It does not take into account part-time students or students who stop-out for one reason or another, but return at a later date to complete their degrees. It seems unfair to rate colleges and universities on partial or flawed data. This could certainly mislead prospective students and their parents into making decisions about institutions without knowing the all of the facts.
The overall goals of the new plan are to help colleges improve, to help students make better informed decisions about which college or university to attend, and to allow policy makers and the public to hold institutions accountable for their outcomes. And the carrot on the stick is to tie the awarding of federal aid to how institutions are rated.
Administration officials, however, are quick to point out that they have listened to the input and the new ratings system will be divided into separate categories for two- and four-year institutions. The new system may also include the differences in institutional characteristics such as degree offerings, program mix, and selectivity. Officials in the department are also considering whether to adjust the metrics to account for student demographics, students’ parental income, first-generation status and college standardized test scores.
One measure administration officials will not include in the new plan is the debt-to-earnings ratio. This caused much criticism in the debate over the controversial gainful employment rule. Another major concern has been over labor-market outcomes of college graduates. Officials have stated that the new plan will not compare colleges on which of their graduates earn more money. Instead it will set a threshold that salaries of graduates much meet. For example, it could be multiplier of the minimum wage or possibly earnings over the poverty line. The goal is to have colleges prepare graduates for employment at a level that will enable them to pay their bills.
One important key factor will be whether Congress will support the administration’s new college-ratings plan. Republicans, who now have control over the Senate and the House, have previously stated their opposition to the new plan. They feel that the federal government has no business rating colleges and universities and they have threatened to cut off funding for this effort.
Despite the threat by Republicans, Administration officials have said that the department will still be on track to release the first ratings by the start of the 2015-16 academic year. The department will continue to take public comments on the new plan through mid-February. This means that the new college-rating system will be in place in eight months.
A system to rate colleges and universities is an excellent idea, in theory. A new college-ratings system would benefit everyone, but most importantly it would benefit the consumer, our students. However, the devil is in the details. If the new system could take into account all of the various aspects of the diversity that exits in higher education institutions across the county, then I am all for it. If it were that simple, it would have already been created. But it is not a simple matter. That’s why the Obama Administration and the U.S. Department of Education are struggling to come up with a new college-ratings system. Will the new college-ratings system please everyone, I don’t think that going to be possible, but I hope I am proven wrong.
The idea for the plan was first announced by President Obama in his State of the Union address three years ago. He put colleges and universities on notice stating that his administration would not continue to subsidize rising tuition costs. A year later, in an August of 2013 speech at the University of Buffalo, as part of a three-campus tour, he denounced the high cost of a college education and promoted his plans to make colleges more affordable. The initial plan, or proposal as it was called, was to rate colleges based on measures of access, affordability and student outcomes, and to allocate federal aid based on those ratings. Thus for example, students attending higher-rated institutions could obtain larger Pell Grants and more affordable loans.
As part of the plan, the U.S. Department of Education announced a series of forums that were be held to discuss the plan and gather feedback on the new ratings system. At each of the forums, criticism was abound about the pitfalls of a one-size-fits-all system of rating colleges. Concerns were raised about a large number of issues: the diverse nature of colleges and universities; how to account for the differences in institutions’ missions and profiles; how retention and graduation rates, employment and continuing-education rates, and loan-repayment and default rates will be used. Other concerns included the data collected by the U.S. Department of Education is deeply flawed; would the new ratings system discourage colleges and universities from enrolling minority and low-income students since they tend to have low success rates; and finally, it will be impossible to please everyone. One national organization of university administrators proposed a simple system of rating colleges based on "social responsibility" by assigning a silver, gold or platinum rating.
The Obama Administration’s new plan has proposed looking at measures such as a college’s average net price, its students’ completion rates, the percentage of its students receiving Pell Grants, labor-market outcomes, and loan-repayment (or rather loan-default) rates. The last two metrics were very controversial during the lengthy fight over the "gainful employment" rule, which was released at the end of last year.
However, the new plan has been condemned more for what it didn’t include than for what measure were included. For example, critics denounce the plan because it doesn’t assign weights to each metric nor does it offer a plan for how similar institutions will be grouped. It also doesn’t provide a specific format for the ratings and it doesn’t clarify whether the department will publish a single, composite rating, or a series of ratings.
University administrators have expressed concern that the plan will punish colleges and universities that serve low-income students and those that prepare graduates for much-needed but low-paying professions. The worry is that a rating system that doesn’t adjust for student demographics and institutional mission, could force colleges to turn away at-risk students, perhaps relax their graduation standards, or even drop degrees in low-paying fields in order to receive higher ratings in the new system.
Additional criticism has focused on how federal data is collected and reported. Specifically, the U.S. Department of Education considers only first-time, full-time students in calculating graduation rates. It does not take into account part-time students or students who stop-out for one reason or another, but return at a later date to complete their degrees. It seems unfair to rate colleges and universities on partial or flawed data. This could certainly mislead prospective students and their parents into making decisions about institutions without knowing the all of the facts.
The overall goals of the new plan are to help colleges improve, to help students make better informed decisions about which college or university to attend, and to allow policy makers and the public to hold institutions accountable for their outcomes. And the carrot on the stick is to tie the awarding of federal aid to how institutions are rated.
Administration officials, however, are quick to point out that they have listened to the input and the new ratings system will be divided into separate categories for two- and four-year institutions. The new system may also include the differences in institutional characteristics such as degree offerings, program mix, and selectivity. Officials in the department are also considering whether to adjust the metrics to account for student demographics, students’ parental income, first-generation status and college standardized test scores.
One measure administration officials will not include in the new plan is the debt-to-earnings ratio. This caused much criticism in the debate over the controversial gainful employment rule. Another major concern has been over labor-market outcomes of college graduates. Officials have stated that the new plan will not compare colleges on which of their graduates earn more money. Instead it will set a threshold that salaries of graduates much meet. For example, it could be multiplier of the minimum wage or possibly earnings over the poverty line. The goal is to have colleges prepare graduates for employment at a level that will enable them to pay their bills.
One important key factor will be whether Congress will support the administration’s new college-ratings plan. Republicans, who now have control over the Senate and the House, have previously stated their opposition to the new plan. They feel that the federal government has no business rating colleges and universities and they have threatened to cut off funding for this effort.
Despite the threat by Republicans, Administration officials have said that the department will still be on track to release the first ratings by the start of the 2015-16 academic year. The department will continue to take public comments on the new plan through mid-February. This means that the new college-rating system will be in place in eight months.
A system to rate colleges and universities is an excellent idea, in theory. A new college-ratings system would benefit everyone, but most importantly it would benefit the consumer, our students. However, the devil is in the details. If the new system could take into account all of the various aspects of the diversity that exits in higher education institutions across the county, then I am all for it. If it were that simple, it would have already been created. But it is not a simple matter. That’s why the Obama Administration and the U.S. Department of Education are struggling to come up with a new college-ratings system. Will the new college-ratings system please everyone, I don’t think that going to be possible, but I hope I am proven wrong.
Thursday, October 30, 2014
College Rankings: The Other Side of Best
At the start of each fall semester, prominent periodicals provide rankings of the best colleges and universities. They examine the quality of colleges within universities, for example, engineering versus business, and they even drill down to the discipline level, ranking of various departments from accounting to zoology. The most common examples are U.S. News and World Report or Washington Monthly, which produce very detailed rankings of colleges and universities across the country.
However, what you don’t see on the newsstands is the rankings of the worst colleges. Only recently, the Washington Monthly examined 1,700 four-year colleges and universities and used a different rankings methodology to identify the twenty worst colleges in America. They produced 4 different lists of the worst colleges based on selected criteria.
The first list of worst colleges was based on four criteria. They examined: 1. The net price, which they defined as tuition minus grants and scholarships; 2. The high average student debt, which is the amount of money students borrowed to attend; 3. The high cohort loan default rate, a federal measure that tracks the percentage of each college’s freshman class that defaults on their student loans within three years of beginning to repay them;, and 4. The low graduation rates. Not surprisingly, the list of the 20 worst colleges was made up of all private colleges, of which 11 were for-profit and nine were non-profit schools and included two Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU’s). There were no public universities on this list. I don’t want to point fingers at these colleges, so I won’t identify them.
The second list was based solely on low graduation rates. It used two criteria to measure completion of the bachelor’s degree. The first was the bachelor’s degree graduation rate and the second was the number of degrees awarded for every 100 full-time equivalent students. While not providing a detailed explanation, the Washington Monthly also, factored into this ranking a college’s borrowing rate and gave it equal weight to the cohort loan default rate, the median borrowing amount, and the net price. Like the first list, all of the colleges on this worst list were private, 12 were for-profit and eight were non-profit. Four of the schools on this list were HBCU’s and none were public institutions. Four schools appeared on both lists.
The third list examined each college’s debt in relation to its borrowing rate. This list also included part-time students by counting the ratio of degrees awarded per 100 full-time equivalent students, thus including all students whether full- or part-time. Sadly, of the 20 colleges on this list, 12 were HBCU’s and two of these schools are public universities. Of the remaining 18 schools, 10 were private non-profit and the other eight were private for-profit colleges. While this does not speak well for HBCU’s, it must be noted that HBCU’s have historically provided a college education to African Americans when there were refused admission to other colleges and universities. And until recently, all of the students attending HBCU’s were first-generation and low income.
The final list of worst colleges took into account graduation rates, but adjusted by the percent of minority and low-income students it enrolled and graduated. Low-income was defined as the number of students who received Pell Grants. The list also considered the net price of attendance for the Pell Grant recipients. Using these criteria, the list was very different compared to the previous three lists. None of the schools in this list were HBCU’s. However, the list was made up of small and expensive private non-profit colleges. Only five of the schools were private for-profit.
As you can see by the different variables used to produce the above four lists, creating a list of the worst, or for that matter best, colleges, requires making judgments that can have adverse effects on those colleges. And the judgments we make does not mean that all colleges are equal and judged equally. A college that enrolls 90% low-income, first-generation, minority students is not the same as a highly selective, private, expensive Ivy League school.
Recently, the Obama administration set out to devise a college rating system that would treat each college and university fairly. They quickly found out that minority serving institutions (HBCU, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Native-American Serving Institutions, etc.) could not be rated with the same criteria as the typical university. At stake would be the loss of federal funding for financial aid and other programs, $200 billion to be exact. As you can imagine, college and university presidents are opposed to the idea. Their key argument is that institutions of higher education are extremely diverse with very different missions, costs and students.
I am writing about this subject not to belittle the colleges on these lists, but to bring to the forefront a major problem that exists in America. We can’t treat all colleges equally, because they are not all created equal. We must look at ways to help minority serving institutions be more successful. We must do research to determine what factors aid minority students at succeeding in college. We must examine those colleges who have high success rates with minority students and determine what they are doing right. We must then disseminate the best practices to all the colleges that serve minority students and provide incentives so that they adopt the best practices. These are the schools who are educating the future workforce, the future leaders of America. We must ensure that they are successful.
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Controlling Tuition Costs
A common complaint you hear these days by students and parents is the rising cost of college tuition, in some cases, a dramatic raise in tuitions and other fees. University administrators argue that the increase in tuition and fees is needed to maintain a quality education for their students. In order to maintain a quality education, universities have to attract top notch faculty, which translates into paying these professors high salaries.
Critics of colleges and universities argue that a college education is already overpriced. To add insult to injury, after students and their parents pay exorbitant costs for a college education, graduates can’t find work, as many of the undergraduate majors do not lead to good paying jobs immediately upon graduation.
Students and their parents are now questioning the value of a college education and evidence of this is the leveling of enrollments, or in some cases enrollment decreases, that we have seen recently in higher education institutions. College and university administrators have been heeding this concern and are instituting tuition freezes, tuition leveling and even tuition cutting. Tuition freeze is typically defined as tuition that is kept unchanged for a specified number of years; however, other fees and room and board charges are typically increased each year. Tuition leveling is where tuition is frozen for four or more years for each class, but college increases tuition for each successive incoming class. This is also known as a guaranteed tuition rate or tuition lock. As the name implies, tuition cuts are where the college reduces tuition by a certain percent, 10%, 20%, or more, and is invariably a one-time event. One side effect of tuition cuts is that the college will also cut financial aid at the same time, since financial need will be reduced for all students.
A survey by conducted FastWeb last year indicated that 21 colleges cut tuition by as little as 8% to as much as 50%. Some of these schools were very creative in cutting tuition, for example, cutting in only certain degree programs or only in-state tuition. One of the positive results of cutting tuition is an increase in student enrollments, which can make up for the lost revenue in tuition. One college in the survey cut tuition by 42% and saw an increase of 60% in freshmen students.
In the same survey, 64 colleges were reported to have frozen tuition. Tuition was held constant for a period of four years, but tuition was increased for each new freshman class entering the university in subsequent years. If a student dropped out and returned, they would have to pay the new tuition rate at the time of reentry, typically higher tuition.
Thirty-two colleges reported that they had instituted tuition leveling. This is becoming popular among college students and parents as costs are held constant, which allows them to better plan for the cost of college. Students are now viewing tuition leveling or tuition cutting as a contractual agreement between the college and the student. Tuition freezes are considered more common in community colleges and public four-year colleges and less common in private four-year schools.
However, students much be cautious not to assume that those colleges that have frozen tuition will keep it frozen throughout their entire college education. During times of a recession, as history has demonstrated, college and university administrators raise tuition to make up for the loss of state and/or federal funding. Moreover, the trend during the last several decades has been for states to decrease funding for their colleges and universities. If the trend continues, tuition freezes or cuts may not be possible.
As a former president, I can tell you that freezing or lowering tuition is a very difficult and tricky task. The costs of operating a college or university are typically fixed costs and rarely, if ever, do they decrease. If anything, operating costs like utilities, employee benefits, to name a few, usually raise at rates higher than the cost of living. Employee salaries are another major cost of operating a university and being able to give salary raises when you are freezing or cutting tuition, can be difficult, if not impossible. For most colleges and universities, tuition is the major source of revenue.
I commend the colleges and universities who have frozen or lowered tuition. I hope that other institutions of higher education follow the example set by these colleges. If colleges and universities do not become more cost effective, I fear that future students will begin to vote with their feet. The signs are already there.
Critics of colleges and universities argue that a college education is already overpriced. To add insult to injury, after students and their parents pay exorbitant costs for a college education, graduates can’t find work, as many of the undergraduate majors do not lead to good paying jobs immediately upon graduation.
Students and their parents are now questioning the value of a college education and evidence of this is the leveling of enrollments, or in some cases enrollment decreases, that we have seen recently in higher education institutions. College and university administrators have been heeding this concern and are instituting tuition freezes, tuition leveling and even tuition cutting. Tuition freeze is typically defined as tuition that is kept unchanged for a specified number of years; however, other fees and room and board charges are typically increased each year. Tuition leveling is where tuition is frozen for four or more years for each class, but college increases tuition for each successive incoming class. This is also known as a guaranteed tuition rate or tuition lock. As the name implies, tuition cuts are where the college reduces tuition by a certain percent, 10%, 20%, or more, and is invariably a one-time event. One side effect of tuition cuts is that the college will also cut financial aid at the same time, since financial need will be reduced for all students.
A survey by conducted FastWeb last year indicated that 21 colleges cut tuition by as little as 8% to as much as 50%. Some of these schools were very creative in cutting tuition, for example, cutting in only certain degree programs or only in-state tuition. One of the positive results of cutting tuition is an increase in student enrollments, which can make up for the lost revenue in tuition. One college in the survey cut tuition by 42% and saw an increase of 60% in freshmen students.
In the same survey, 64 colleges were reported to have frozen tuition. Tuition was held constant for a period of four years, but tuition was increased for each new freshman class entering the university in subsequent years. If a student dropped out and returned, they would have to pay the new tuition rate at the time of reentry, typically higher tuition.
Thirty-two colleges reported that they had instituted tuition leveling. This is becoming popular among college students and parents as costs are held constant, which allows them to better plan for the cost of college. Students are now viewing tuition leveling or tuition cutting as a contractual agreement between the college and the student. Tuition freezes are considered more common in community colleges and public four-year colleges and less common in private four-year schools.
However, students much be cautious not to assume that those colleges that have frozen tuition will keep it frozen throughout their entire college education. During times of a recession, as history has demonstrated, college and university administrators raise tuition to make up for the loss of state and/or federal funding. Moreover, the trend during the last several decades has been for states to decrease funding for their colleges and universities. If the trend continues, tuition freezes or cuts may not be possible.
As a former president, I can tell you that freezing or lowering tuition is a very difficult and tricky task. The costs of operating a college or university are typically fixed costs and rarely, if ever, do they decrease. If anything, operating costs like utilities, employee benefits, to name a few, usually raise at rates higher than the cost of living. Employee salaries are another major cost of operating a university and being able to give salary raises when you are freezing or cutting tuition, can be difficult, if not impossible. For most colleges and universities, tuition is the major source of revenue.
I commend the colleges and universities who have frozen or lowered tuition. I hope that other institutions of higher education follow the example set by these colleges. If colleges and universities do not become more cost effective, I fear that future students will begin to vote with their feet. The signs are already there.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
The Cost of College Textbooks
My last blog focused on the millions of college students who have started college classes this fall. One of the daunting tasks facing college students across America is the purchase of college textbooks. For students and parents who, in many cases, pay for the textbooks, the cost is very high, actually outrageous in some cases.
The College Board reported the average cost for books and supplies for the 2013–2014 school year was $1,207 at public colleges and $1,253 at private colleges. But the cost can vary dramatically between the public and private schools. For example, Harvard University lists on their official website the average cost of books as $3,643 per year, three times the national average. I also looked at a typical public university, Humboldt State University, in northern California and their average cost of books is $1,612, or 56% less than the average cost of books at Harvard and 33% higher than the national average. For additional comparison, I examined the cost of attendance at St. Louis Community College and their website lists the cost of books as $1,000.
The Huffington Post reported that the cost of college textbooks has risen 812% since 1978, compared to medical services at 575%, new home prices at 325%, or the Consumer Price Index at 250% over the same period. Like tuition, the cost of college textbooks has outpaced all other consumer goods.
An important variable that impacts the cost of college textbooks is the discipline. College textbooks for mathematics, the hard sciences, medicine, or law will be much more expensive than books in other disciplines. In other words, a college calculus book will cost a lot more than an introduction to psychology book. For example, a new college calculus book by James Stewart, 7th edition, touted as the world’s best-seller, will cost $285.50 on textbooks.com or less for a used version of the book, depending on the condition of the book. An introduction to psychology book will cost $170.75 new on textbook.com and as little as $25 for a used copy.
Part of what drives up the price of college textbooks is the publisher bundling the books with supplemental material such as work books, study guides or CD’s and access to websites. When textbooks are bundled, a student cannot buy just the text book. Another strategy textbook publishers use to jack up the price is to issue newer editions of the book. It is estimated that new editions of textbooks are released on average every 3.9 years.
I have some solutions to the high cost of textbooks. I have always told my students to buy used books as they will be much less expensive. I have also informed student to buy books from students who took the class previously, assuming the professor is using the same book. I have also suggested to buy a book with a classmate and share it. However, sharing can have it drawbacks, like not having access to the book when you need it. Another option to consider would be to buy the books on-line via textbook.com, eBay, or Amazon. They typically are cheaper than college bookstores. Other options include renting a text book or buying an e-book or electronic version of the book, but you will need to have an e-reader or a computer. However, renting a book may not always be cheaper, as you lose money if you don’t take special care of the rental book when you have to return it. And e-books aren’t always that much cheaper than buying a new book.
I suggest, before renting a book, you should consider the cost of a used book and the money you will recoup when you re-sell it to the bookstore, versus the cost of renting the same textbook. My students, and most students in the different universities with which I have been associated, have preferred used books over rentals or e-books. At the bookstore of one university where I worked, 65% of the books stocked and sold were used, and, as a result, the students at that school wanted more used text books.
Another suggestion is to purchase an older edition of a college textbook since they tend to be cheaper, but one has to be careful that the material has not changed significantly. Also, if it is a mathematics book, the end of each chapter can be different. But that can easily be solved by borrowing the new textbook from a classmate and copying the new problem sets.
One final suggestion and a little known fact that most students on college campuses may not be aware of is that most colleges and universities will place a textbook for their courses on reserve in the library. This is great for students who can’t afford to buy textbooks, but there is a downside. Typically, college libraries will not allow students to check out books on reserve or, if they do allow check-out, it will be for a very short period to time, in some cases only a couple of hours.
I talked to my son, who is a senior majoring in mechanical engineering, and he does not buy e-books, but rather prefers used books and re-sells them to the bookstore if he decides not the keep the book. An informal survey of his friends confirms that e-books are not a common choice. They too prefer used books.
It is worth the effort to do the research and consider all options available before purchasing a college textbook. It will pay off in the short term and may save you lots of money over the course of four… or five….years of buying textbooks.
The College Board reported the average cost for books and supplies for the 2013–2014 school year was $1,207 at public colleges and $1,253 at private colleges. But the cost can vary dramatically between the public and private schools. For example, Harvard University lists on their official website the average cost of books as $3,643 per year, three times the national average. I also looked at a typical public university, Humboldt State University, in northern California and their average cost of books is $1,612, or 56% less than the average cost of books at Harvard and 33% higher than the national average. For additional comparison, I examined the cost of attendance at St. Louis Community College and their website lists the cost of books as $1,000.
The Huffington Post reported that the cost of college textbooks has risen 812% since 1978, compared to medical services at 575%, new home prices at 325%, or the Consumer Price Index at 250% over the same period. Like tuition, the cost of college textbooks has outpaced all other consumer goods.
An important variable that impacts the cost of college textbooks is the discipline. College textbooks for mathematics, the hard sciences, medicine, or law will be much more expensive than books in other disciplines. In other words, a college calculus book will cost a lot more than an introduction to psychology book. For example, a new college calculus book by James Stewart, 7th edition, touted as the world’s best-seller, will cost $285.50 on textbooks.com or less for a used version of the book, depending on the condition of the book. An introduction to psychology book will cost $170.75 new on textbook.com and as little as $25 for a used copy.
Part of what drives up the price of college textbooks is the publisher bundling the books with supplemental material such as work books, study guides or CD’s and access to websites. When textbooks are bundled, a student cannot buy just the text book. Another strategy textbook publishers use to jack up the price is to issue newer editions of the book. It is estimated that new editions of textbooks are released on average every 3.9 years.
I have some solutions to the high cost of textbooks. I have always told my students to buy used books as they will be much less expensive. I have also informed student to buy books from students who took the class previously, assuming the professor is using the same book. I have also suggested to buy a book with a classmate and share it. However, sharing can have it drawbacks, like not having access to the book when you need it. Another option to consider would be to buy the books on-line via textbook.com, eBay, or Amazon. They typically are cheaper than college bookstores. Other options include renting a text book or buying an e-book or electronic version of the book, but you will need to have an e-reader or a computer. However, renting a book may not always be cheaper, as you lose money if you don’t take special care of the rental book when you have to return it. And e-books aren’t always that much cheaper than buying a new book.
I suggest, before renting a book, you should consider the cost of a used book and the money you will recoup when you re-sell it to the bookstore, versus the cost of renting the same textbook. My students, and most students in the different universities with which I have been associated, have preferred used books over rentals or e-books. At the bookstore of one university where I worked, 65% of the books stocked and sold were used, and, as a result, the students at that school wanted more used text books.
Another suggestion is to purchase an older edition of a college textbook since they tend to be cheaper, but one has to be careful that the material has not changed significantly. Also, if it is a mathematics book, the end of each chapter can be different. But that can easily be solved by borrowing the new textbook from a classmate and copying the new problem sets.
One final suggestion and a little known fact that most students on college campuses may not be aware of is that most colleges and universities will place a textbook for their courses on reserve in the library. This is great for students who can’t afford to buy textbooks, but there is a downside. Typically, college libraries will not allow students to check out books on reserve or, if they do allow check-out, it will be for a very short period to time, in some cases only a couple of hours.
I talked to my son, who is a senior majoring in mechanical engineering, and he does not buy e-books, but rather prefers used books and re-sells them to the bookstore if he decides not the keep the book. An informal survey of his friends confirms that e-books are not a common choice. They too prefer used books.
It is worth the effort to do the research and consider all options available before purchasing a college textbook. It will pay off in the short term and may save you lots of money over the course of four… or five….years of buying textbooks.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
That Time of Year Again: The Start of College And Getting to Know Each Other
It is that time of year again. Fall is when the summer heat and humidity starts to subside and cool nights begin. It is the start of football season and the Friday night lights or Saturday afternoon games. It is also the time when our society begins one of its most important tasks, i.e, educating our future workforce and our next generation of leaders.
From mid-August through early September, about 22.1 millions students will start college or university classes. In the fall of 2013, public and private two- and four-year institutions of higher education enrolled 21.8 million students: females make up the majority of the students at 12.5 million and males 9.3 million. This fall, The National Center for Educational Statistics projects that colleges and universities will enroll nearly 22.1 million students, an increase of barely 1 percent.
And 1.5 million college professors, or more specifically referred to by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics as post-secondary teachers, will teach these students courses from accounting to zoology and everything in between. A quick glance at course listings of a few colleges reveals some interesting courses such as Elementary Yiddish at UCLA; Tightwaddery or the Good Life on a Dollar a Day at Alfred University; Underwater Basket Weaving, yes folks it does really exist, at Reed College; Introduction to Turntablism, a course to learn how to become a DJ, at Oberlin Experimental College; The Joy of Garbage at Santa Clara University; and my favorite An Introduction to Wines at Cornell University. Why was this course not offered when I went to college? Although, I was not sophisticated enough to be into, much less, enjoy wine.
As a former college professor, one of the common questions you ask yourself is what do you do on your first day of classes. You are obviously an expert in the subject matter you are going to teach. But, on the first day almost all professors do NOT begin teaching. And those that do teach on the very first day are viewed as not being cool by the students. So the pressure it on, what do you do to be cool? Typically most professors will call the roll, review the syllabus, ask if there are any questions and dismiss class. Some professors will even introduce icebreaker games so that the professor can get to know the students and the students can get to know each other.
Josh Boldt, a writer and editor who teaches at University of Georgia, recently wrote an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education on this very subject. After reviewing the syllabus he hands out a note card to each student and asks them to write down three things: 1. their names, 2. where they are from, city and state, and 3. some element of popular culture they currently happen to be following. He tells the students it can be anything like a film, a book, a magazine, a website, a piece of music, whatever they are into at that moment.
This is a very clever idea as it allows the professor to get an immediate glimpse into the personalities of his students and to get to know his students quickly. It also provides some insight into what interests students these days. Given the age difference between the typical professor and his students, this exercise may provide the professor some valuable information about his students.
Once the writing task is completed the students are asked to pair up with another student and share their answers. He then asks the students to trade cards and every student must introduce their partner. Connections are formed immediately as students learn that they are from the same town as another student in the class, like the same TV series or read the same author. It makes it easier for students to get to know each other from the beginning. Students now have an easy reason to approach one another, a valuable tool for the shy or timid students in the class.
Josh ends the class right after the introductions and suggests that students are more talkative on the way out than they were on the way in. And he uses the note cards to take roll until he learns the names of his students. The added bonus is that he quickly learns something about his students that he might not have otherwise known. This creates an instant connection with the student and the professor can use this as a way to interact with his students rather than having to use the course subject matter.
In reading Josh’s article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, it reminded me of what I used to do on the first day of classes. I have used a similar icebreaker and have asked my students to tell their classmates 3 things about themselves, their names, their home town and one interesting tidbit about themselves. But instead of writing the answers, I ask the students to remember the answers. Three items are not hard to remember. The military services ask each recruit to memorize name, rank, and serial number. Psychologists have demonstrated that the human brain can remember up to seven items. That is why telephone numbers are seven digits.
Like Josh, I would ask my students to pair up with another student and share their their answers. I would start the icebreaker by introducing myself, telling my students where I was from and my interesting tidbit that I am an amateur vintner and have been making wine for 15 years. Then each student was asked to introduce their partner. It helps “break the ice” and students in my classes have gotten to know each other. I have found that students will form immediate natural connections as they may be into the same things as other students in the class.
I did a quick search on the internet and found some interesting ideas for icebreakers to use on the first day of classes. Here are some suggestions: 1. Categories, organize students into small groups based on categories such as favorite color; 2. Gotcha, form the students in a circle and have them place the right finger on next person's left palm, the objective is to try to grab a finger before yours gets grabbed; 3. Fears in a Hat, have each student write a personal fear anonymously on a piece of paper and place it in a hat. Each student then randomly selects and reads someone else's fear to the group and explains how the person might feel; or 4. Have you ever? Each student shares an experience and allows the group to celebrate the diversity of students’ past experiences.
In my opinion, the best icebreakers are those activities that allow the students to get to know each other and allows the professor to get to know the students. The activity should draw on the students’ personal experiences, but preferably not something private. The icebreaker should be structured so that it is easy for the students to talk. It should not be about the content of the course you are about to teach. It should help establish camaraderie among the students. I suggest you start the activity with yourself so that students get to know you right away. What do you do on the first day of teaching a college class?
From mid-August through early September, about 22.1 millions students will start college or university classes. In the fall of 2013, public and private two- and four-year institutions of higher education enrolled 21.8 million students: females make up the majority of the students at 12.5 million and males 9.3 million. This fall, The National Center for Educational Statistics projects that colleges and universities will enroll nearly 22.1 million students, an increase of barely 1 percent.
And 1.5 million college professors, or more specifically referred to by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics as post-secondary teachers, will teach these students courses from accounting to zoology and everything in between. A quick glance at course listings of a few colleges reveals some interesting courses such as Elementary Yiddish at UCLA; Tightwaddery or the Good Life on a Dollar a Day at Alfred University; Underwater Basket Weaving, yes folks it does really exist, at Reed College; Introduction to Turntablism, a course to learn how to become a DJ, at Oberlin Experimental College; The Joy of Garbage at Santa Clara University; and my favorite An Introduction to Wines at Cornell University. Why was this course not offered when I went to college? Although, I was not sophisticated enough to be into, much less, enjoy wine.
As a former college professor, one of the common questions you ask yourself is what do you do on your first day of classes. You are obviously an expert in the subject matter you are going to teach. But, on the first day almost all professors do NOT begin teaching. And those that do teach on the very first day are viewed as not being cool by the students. So the pressure it on, what do you do to be cool? Typically most professors will call the roll, review the syllabus, ask if there are any questions and dismiss class. Some professors will even introduce icebreaker games so that the professor can get to know the students and the students can get to know each other.
Josh Boldt, a writer and editor who teaches at University of Georgia, recently wrote an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education on this very subject. After reviewing the syllabus he hands out a note card to each student and asks them to write down three things: 1. their names, 2. where they are from, city and state, and 3. some element of popular culture they currently happen to be following. He tells the students it can be anything like a film, a book, a magazine, a website, a piece of music, whatever they are into at that moment.
This is a very clever idea as it allows the professor to get an immediate glimpse into the personalities of his students and to get to know his students quickly. It also provides some insight into what interests students these days. Given the age difference between the typical professor and his students, this exercise may provide the professor some valuable information about his students.
Once the writing task is completed the students are asked to pair up with another student and share their answers. He then asks the students to trade cards and every student must introduce their partner. Connections are formed immediately as students learn that they are from the same town as another student in the class, like the same TV series or read the same author. It makes it easier for students to get to know each other from the beginning. Students now have an easy reason to approach one another, a valuable tool for the shy or timid students in the class.
Josh ends the class right after the introductions and suggests that students are more talkative on the way out than they were on the way in. And he uses the note cards to take roll until he learns the names of his students. The added bonus is that he quickly learns something about his students that he might not have otherwise known. This creates an instant connection with the student and the professor can use this as a way to interact with his students rather than having to use the course subject matter.
In reading Josh’s article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, it reminded me of what I used to do on the first day of classes. I have used a similar icebreaker and have asked my students to tell their classmates 3 things about themselves, their names, their home town and one interesting tidbit about themselves. But instead of writing the answers, I ask the students to remember the answers. Three items are not hard to remember. The military services ask each recruit to memorize name, rank, and serial number. Psychologists have demonstrated that the human brain can remember up to seven items. That is why telephone numbers are seven digits.
Like Josh, I would ask my students to pair up with another student and share their their answers. I would start the icebreaker by introducing myself, telling my students where I was from and my interesting tidbit that I am an amateur vintner and have been making wine for 15 years. Then each student was asked to introduce their partner. It helps “break the ice” and students in my classes have gotten to know each other. I have found that students will form immediate natural connections as they may be into the same things as other students in the class.
I did a quick search on the internet and found some interesting ideas for icebreakers to use on the first day of classes. Here are some suggestions: 1. Categories, organize students into small groups based on categories such as favorite color; 2. Gotcha, form the students in a circle and have them place the right finger on next person's left palm, the objective is to try to grab a finger before yours gets grabbed; 3. Fears in a Hat, have each student write a personal fear anonymously on a piece of paper and place it in a hat. Each student then randomly selects and reads someone else's fear to the group and explains how the person might feel; or 4. Have you ever? Each student shares an experience and allows the group to celebrate the diversity of students’ past experiences.
In my opinion, the best icebreakers are those activities that allow the students to get to know each other and allows the professor to get to know the students. The activity should draw on the students’ personal experiences, but preferably not something private. The icebreaker should be structured so that it is easy for the students to talk. It should not be about the content of the course you are about to teach. It should help establish camaraderie among the students. I suggest you start the activity with yourself so that students get to know you right away. What do you do on the first day of teaching a college class?
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
The Price of a College Degree. Is it Worth the Price?
For several years now, Americans have been questioning the value of higher education. Is a college degree worth the thousands of dollars it costs? Does the bachelors’ degree lead to a good paying job? Higher education faces many challenges in the nation. Unfortunately, one major challenge is the escalating cost of a college education. And as Americans question its value, the college degree has begun to lose its prominence in the minds of many Americans. The evidence to support this is the decline in enrollments in colleges and universities throughout the country. The problem has been further fueled by the high unemployment rates and the need by Americans for employment and the promise of a steady income.
The National Center for Education Statistics reported that there was a 2% drop in the enrollment of undergraduates in colleges and universities across the country from 2010 to 2012. Additionally, the U.S. Census Bureau reported a decline in college enrollments in the fall of 2012 by half a million students compared to the previous year. According to Census Bureau data the biggest drop was among older students, those 25 and older, and among white students who saw a decline from 67% to 58%. Surprisingly, Hispanic and African American students did not follow the trend, but rather their enrollments increased during the same period, from 11% to 17% for Hispanics and from 14% to 15% for African Americans. More recently, the Chronicle of Higher Education related that college enrollments this past spring semester decreased by 0.8% for the third year in a row. This is compared to a 2.3% decline over the previous one year period. The biggest drop, 4.9%, occurred among four-year for-profit colleges compared to 9.7% decline last year, and at two-year public colleges, which fell by 2.7%. Thirty-seven states saw enrollment declines, while 13 states reported increases.
One logical assumption is that the drop in college enrollments was precipitated by the number of high school graduates not going on to college. The U.S. Department of Labor reported that indeed fewer high school graduates were going on to college last year: 65.9% in 2013 versus 66.2% in 2012. The drop; however, was only 3 tenths of one percent. While this is minimal, it does not account for the larger drop in college enrollments.
Today, the public and politicians expect colleges and universities to provide an education that leads immediately to a good paying job. College administrators can no longer expect students and parents to incur debt to fund an education that in many instances leads to uncertain career opportunities. Higher education has been steadily pricing itself out of the market in the minds of Americans. Data from the National Center of Education Statistics indicate that the cost of college (tuition, fees, and room and board) rose 40% at public institutions of higher education and rose 28% at private non-profit institutions during a ten-year period, 2002 to 2012. According to an August 15, 2012 Bloomberg article, “college tuition and fees have surged 1,120%… since 1978, four times faster than the increase in the consumer price index.”
Nationwide, colleges and universities have gotten so expensive creating a perception that the pursuit of higher learning is no longer as valuable as in past years. U.S. News and World Report, in a recent article, suggested that while tuition prices at public four-year colleges are growing more slowly than they have in more than 30 year, the fact remains that tuition has dramatically outpaced other consumer goods. For example, from 2003 to 2013 college tuition grew nearly 80% while Medicare grew 43.1%, Food and Beverages 31.2%, Housing 22.8%, Men’s Apparel, 6.9% and Women’s Apparel 5.6%, as compared to an increase in the Consumer Price Index of 26.7% during the same ten-year period.
The dramatic increase in college costs has been due in large part to the recession and a weak economy, both at the state and national levels; dramatic cuts in state funds to public higher education institutions; and drops in enrollments, due to the scrutiny of the value of higher education. Inside Higher Ed recently reported that there has been a 7.6% drop in state appropriations for colleges in 2012, the largest decline in a half a century. Forty-one of the fifty states cut their spending for higher education from as little of 1% in Indiana to as much as 41% in New Hampshire. In the last five years spending by states nationwide is down 28%. All but two states, North Dakota and Wyoming, cut funding for their institutions of higher education. Thirty-six states cut higher education funding by more than 20%, eleven states have cut funding by more than one-third, and two states, Arizona and New Hampshire, have cut their higher education spending in half. At the federal level, budget cuts have impacted research programs, student support and financial aid programs and many other programs that support students who attend our institutions of higher education.
In response to these budget cuts, colleges and universities have raised tuition to make up the difference. Over the last 25 years, the share of public university revenues coming from tuition and fees has climbed steadily to 47% this year, from 23% in 1987, according to a March 6, 2013 article in the New York Times. Moreover, college administrators, due mostly in response to pressure coming from legislators and governors, have begun to freeze tuition and fees, a move that unfortunately is not sustainable, given that the other costs of doing business will not freeze. As colleges raise tuition costs, the anticipated effect is a potential drop in enrollments. To ameliorate this effect, colleges have discounted tuition by providing scholarships and other forms of student financial aid, a practice that private, high-priced institutions have followed for many years. But rather than adjusting to a new model of doing business when the economy starts to recover, the reliance on tuition revenue has created a "new normal" for higher education funding that is simply not sustainable.
Many Americans have begun to believe that a bachelor’s degree is now the financial equivalent to a high school diploma of ten years ago. However, the most important message that must be disseminated is that with a college degree, graduates are more likely to obtain higher quality and more well-paying jobs. According to College Board, college graduates with bachelor’s degrees have a 61% higher earnings potential than high school graduates.
Historically, higher education was originally created in Greece in the sixth century BC to impart knowledge to the elite and the clergy. It later expanded to medicine, philosophy, mathematics and the study of the nature of humanity and the universe. Through the centuries, higher education has maintained the imparting and expanding of knowledge as one of its primary functions, but what has changed is the characteristics of the students. Today, higher education prepares individuals to think critically, analyze, and draw conclusions to solve problems in an ever increasing global society. Liberal arts degrees, for example, teach these skills, yet a bachelor’s degree in liberal arts does not lead immediately to a high paying job. Therein lies the dilemma for higher education. Does higher education continue to educate students with a centuries old model or does higher education change to meet the needs for our society?
The dilemma institutions face, as they continue to raise tuition and fees at record levels, is that attendance will become out of reach for an increasing number of students, especially minority, first-generation, low-income students, which will diminish dramatically their chances of completing a degree. Horace Mann, the great education reformer of the 19th century, once said, “Education … is the great equalizer…” I am a perfect example of this phenomenon.
One of the primary assumptions in our society is that a higher education degree leads to a good paying job. However, not all college degrees lead to an immediate career and a good paying job, yet increasingly the public and more specifically politicians are expecting colleges to produce larger numbers of job-ready graduates. The challenge facing higher education is to move away from the ancient model of educating for enlightenment and changing the paradigm to meet the needs our society in the 21st Century. College and University presidents, particularly in the public sector, must get together and re-invent the university for the 21st Century. If not, students will vote with their feet as they are starting to do now.
The National Center for Education Statistics reported that there was a 2% drop in the enrollment of undergraduates in colleges and universities across the country from 2010 to 2012. Additionally, the U.S. Census Bureau reported a decline in college enrollments in the fall of 2012 by half a million students compared to the previous year. According to Census Bureau data the biggest drop was among older students, those 25 and older, and among white students who saw a decline from 67% to 58%. Surprisingly, Hispanic and African American students did not follow the trend, but rather their enrollments increased during the same period, from 11% to 17% for Hispanics and from 14% to 15% for African Americans. More recently, the Chronicle of Higher Education related that college enrollments this past spring semester decreased by 0.8% for the third year in a row. This is compared to a 2.3% decline over the previous one year period. The biggest drop, 4.9%, occurred among four-year for-profit colleges compared to 9.7% decline last year, and at two-year public colleges, which fell by 2.7%. Thirty-seven states saw enrollment declines, while 13 states reported increases.
One logical assumption is that the drop in college enrollments was precipitated by the number of high school graduates not going on to college. The U.S. Department of Labor reported that indeed fewer high school graduates were going on to college last year: 65.9% in 2013 versus 66.2% in 2012. The drop; however, was only 3 tenths of one percent. While this is minimal, it does not account for the larger drop in college enrollments.
Today, the public and politicians expect colleges and universities to provide an education that leads immediately to a good paying job. College administrators can no longer expect students and parents to incur debt to fund an education that in many instances leads to uncertain career opportunities. Higher education has been steadily pricing itself out of the market in the minds of Americans. Data from the National Center of Education Statistics indicate that the cost of college (tuition, fees, and room and board) rose 40% at public institutions of higher education and rose 28% at private non-profit institutions during a ten-year period, 2002 to 2012. According to an August 15, 2012 Bloomberg article, “college tuition and fees have surged 1,120%… since 1978, four times faster than the increase in the consumer price index.”
Nationwide, colleges and universities have gotten so expensive creating a perception that the pursuit of higher learning is no longer as valuable as in past years. U.S. News and World Report, in a recent article, suggested that while tuition prices at public four-year colleges are growing more slowly than they have in more than 30 year, the fact remains that tuition has dramatically outpaced other consumer goods. For example, from 2003 to 2013 college tuition grew nearly 80% while Medicare grew 43.1%, Food and Beverages 31.2%, Housing 22.8%, Men’s Apparel, 6.9% and Women’s Apparel 5.6%, as compared to an increase in the Consumer Price Index of 26.7% during the same ten-year period.
The dramatic increase in college costs has been due in large part to the recession and a weak economy, both at the state and national levels; dramatic cuts in state funds to public higher education institutions; and drops in enrollments, due to the scrutiny of the value of higher education. Inside Higher Ed recently reported that there has been a 7.6% drop in state appropriations for colleges in 2012, the largest decline in a half a century. Forty-one of the fifty states cut their spending for higher education from as little of 1% in Indiana to as much as 41% in New Hampshire. In the last five years spending by states nationwide is down 28%. All but two states, North Dakota and Wyoming, cut funding for their institutions of higher education. Thirty-six states cut higher education funding by more than 20%, eleven states have cut funding by more than one-third, and two states, Arizona and New Hampshire, have cut their higher education spending in half. At the federal level, budget cuts have impacted research programs, student support and financial aid programs and many other programs that support students who attend our institutions of higher education.
In response to these budget cuts, colleges and universities have raised tuition to make up the difference. Over the last 25 years, the share of public university revenues coming from tuition and fees has climbed steadily to 47% this year, from 23% in 1987, according to a March 6, 2013 article in the New York Times. Moreover, college administrators, due mostly in response to pressure coming from legislators and governors, have begun to freeze tuition and fees, a move that unfortunately is not sustainable, given that the other costs of doing business will not freeze. As colleges raise tuition costs, the anticipated effect is a potential drop in enrollments. To ameliorate this effect, colleges have discounted tuition by providing scholarships and other forms of student financial aid, a practice that private, high-priced institutions have followed for many years. But rather than adjusting to a new model of doing business when the economy starts to recover, the reliance on tuition revenue has created a "new normal" for higher education funding that is simply not sustainable.
Many Americans have begun to believe that a bachelor’s degree is now the financial equivalent to a high school diploma of ten years ago. However, the most important message that must be disseminated is that with a college degree, graduates are more likely to obtain higher quality and more well-paying jobs. According to College Board, college graduates with bachelor’s degrees have a 61% higher earnings potential than high school graduates.
Historically, higher education was originally created in Greece in the sixth century BC to impart knowledge to the elite and the clergy. It later expanded to medicine, philosophy, mathematics and the study of the nature of humanity and the universe. Through the centuries, higher education has maintained the imparting and expanding of knowledge as one of its primary functions, but what has changed is the characteristics of the students. Today, higher education prepares individuals to think critically, analyze, and draw conclusions to solve problems in an ever increasing global society. Liberal arts degrees, for example, teach these skills, yet a bachelor’s degree in liberal arts does not lead immediately to a high paying job. Therein lies the dilemma for higher education. Does higher education continue to educate students with a centuries old model or does higher education change to meet the needs for our society?
The dilemma institutions face, as they continue to raise tuition and fees at record levels, is that attendance will become out of reach for an increasing number of students, especially minority, first-generation, low-income students, which will diminish dramatically their chances of completing a degree. Horace Mann, the great education reformer of the 19th century, once said, “Education … is the great equalizer…” I am a perfect example of this phenomenon.
One of the primary assumptions in our society is that a higher education degree leads to a good paying job. However, not all college degrees lead to an immediate career and a good paying job, yet increasingly the public and more specifically politicians are expecting colleges to produce larger numbers of job-ready graduates. The challenge facing higher education is to move away from the ancient model of educating for enlightenment and changing the paradigm to meet the needs our society in the 21st Century. College and University presidents, particularly in the public sector, must get together and re-invent the university for the 21st Century. If not, students will vote with their feet as they are starting to do now.
Monday, August 4, 2014
Sexual Predators on College Campuses
Prominent in the news today in the nation and especially in higher education is the problem of sexual assaults on college campuses. The issue has become so big that it is now considered a crisis. Just pick up any newspaper or weekly periodical to confirm that sexual assaults are now a major national problem across colleges and universities. For example, the cover of Time Magazine May 26, 2014 issue reads “Crisis: Sexual Assaults in Higher Education.”
First, let me be clear, sexual assault and rape is not right. Perpetrators should be convicted to the fullest extent of the law if guilty. We as a society should not tolerate rapists. It is totally unacceptable.
Consider some frightening national statistics compiled by the New York State Coalition Against Sexual Assaults as reported by Sarah Lawrence College:
The legislation comes just a year after a Senate subcommittee released a survey showing that 41% of a sample of 236 colleges had not conducted investigations of alleged sexual assaults during the last five years even thought some of these colleges had reported sexual violence incidents during the same time period. This is precisely why legislators are upset and are taking action. “Colleges now have no incentive to keep accurate records of sexual assaults” said Sen Kirsten Gillibrand, one of the sponsors of the bill, “we are flipping the incentives” … “Underreporting will have stiff fines and real teeth.”
Last year Congress passed the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act. This new law requires public and private institutions of higher education to increase transparency about the scope of sexual violence on campus, to provide more information about standards in college conduct proceedings, and to provide campus- and community-wide prevention education programs. These new polices must be in place by this fall.
The counter reaction by colleges is represented by Terry Hartle, a senior vice president at the American Council on Education, which represents colleges and universities in Washington Hartle called the legislation "a pretty heavy-handed approach." He goes on to say that "Sexual assault cases on college campuses are often incredibly difficult to resolve. I think some of the sponsors believe universities do not want to do the right thing."
Having been a president of a public university, I, for one, took sexual assaults very seriously, making sure the victim(s) received the appropriate services and counseling, the incident(s) were properly investigated, and the alleged perpetrator(s) prosecuted, if the facts in the case warranted. I can assure you that every college and university president in this country takes sexual assaults very seriously and takes the appropriate actions. In almost all cases it is up to the campus police and the district attorney to determine if charges are to be filed and what charges will be filed, based on the facts of a given case.
However, one has to consider that not only does the victim have rights, but also the perpetrator. One of the basic tenets of our legal system and that of colleges’ judicial process is the right to due process. Due process is rooted in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and states that “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possession… except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.” This has been expanded by the U.S. Supreme Court over the years to include the right to a hearing of peers, notice of the charges, right to present evidence and call witnesses, the right to know the opposing evidence, the right to cross-examine opposing evidence and witnesses, the opportunity to be represented by an attorney and other provisions. I can tell you that every university adheres to the principle of due process in sexual assaults and other incidents that occur on campus.
Terry Hartle’s comments initially can be viewed as defensive on the part of those of us in higher education. My own experience as a president it that Terry is correct in stating that sexual assault cases on campus can often be very difficult to resolve. Gathering the facts take time and often the victim is reluctant to talk or provide evidence. On the other hand, the perpetrator often times provides a counter story and evidence suggesting that the sex was consensual rather than forced. Many campuses now have cameras in the hallways of residence halls and always provide irrefutable evidence that a crime was most likely committed. It is clearly important that Presidents of colleges and deans of students do the right thing in sexual assault cases by following the colleges’ policies and procedures, applying due process and, if the evidence suggests, push for prosecution. I believe that every college president in our country does the right thing. if not, I can assure you he or she would not be president for long.
I have a 17 year-old daughter who will start her senior year in high school this fall. Having worked in higher education almost all of my entire career, I know intimately what happens in colleges and universities, especially at parties where alcohol and drug use and abuse leads to many sexual assaults. In a time when there is a 25% chance of female students being sexually assaulted, a sober discussion by administrators needs to be started immediately. I certainly have begun to seriously ponder this question, and will be advocating for more action by college and university presidents in future articles. My daughter will be entering college next year, and I want to know, as a parent, that she will be safe.
First, let me be clear, sexual assault and rape is not right. Perpetrators should be convicted to the fullest extent of the law if guilty. We as a society should not tolerate rapists. It is totally unacceptable.
Consider some frightening national statistics compiled by the New York State Coalition Against Sexual Assaults as reported by Sarah Lawrence College:
- 1 in 4 (25%) women will be a victim of a sexual assault on college campuses during their academic career.
- At least 80% of all sexual assaults are committed by an acquaintance of the victim.
- 48.8% of college women who were victims of sexual attacks did not consider what happened to them as rape.
- More than 70% of rape victims knew their attackers, compared to approximately half of all violent crime victims.
- On average, at least 50% of college students’ sexual assaults are associated with alcohol use. In a national study which reported a represented sample of college students, the result found that 74% of perpetrators and 55% of rape victims has been drinking alcohol prior to the assault. In a survey of high school students, 56% of girls and 76% of boys believed that forced sex was acceptable under some circumstances.
The legislation comes just a year after a Senate subcommittee released a survey showing that 41% of a sample of 236 colleges had not conducted investigations of alleged sexual assaults during the last five years even thought some of these colleges had reported sexual violence incidents during the same time period. This is precisely why legislators are upset and are taking action. “Colleges now have no incentive to keep accurate records of sexual assaults” said Sen Kirsten Gillibrand, one of the sponsors of the bill, “we are flipping the incentives” … “Underreporting will have stiff fines and real teeth.”
Last year Congress passed the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act. This new law requires public and private institutions of higher education to increase transparency about the scope of sexual violence on campus, to provide more information about standards in college conduct proceedings, and to provide campus- and community-wide prevention education programs. These new polices must be in place by this fall.
The counter reaction by colleges is represented by Terry Hartle, a senior vice president at the American Council on Education, which represents colleges and universities in Washington Hartle called the legislation "a pretty heavy-handed approach." He goes on to say that "Sexual assault cases on college campuses are often incredibly difficult to resolve. I think some of the sponsors believe universities do not want to do the right thing."
Having been a president of a public university, I, for one, took sexual assaults very seriously, making sure the victim(s) received the appropriate services and counseling, the incident(s) were properly investigated, and the alleged perpetrator(s) prosecuted, if the facts in the case warranted. I can assure you that every college and university president in this country takes sexual assaults very seriously and takes the appropriate actions. In almost all cases it is up to the campus police and the district attorney to determine if charges are to be filed and what charges will be filed, based on the facts of a given case.
However, one has to consider that not only does the victim have rights, but also the perpetrator. One of the basic tenets of our legal system and that of colleges’ judicial process is the right to due process. Due process is rooted in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and states that “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possession… except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.” This has been expanded by the U.S. Supreme Court over the years to include the right to a hearing of peers, notice of the charges, right to present evidence and call witnesses, the right to know the opposing evidence, the right to cross-examine opposing evidence and witnesses, the opportunity to be represented by an attorney and other provisions. I can tell you that every university adheres to the principle of due process in sexual assaults and other incidents that occur on campus.
Terry Hartle’s comments initially can be viewed as defensive on the part of those of us in higher education. My own experience as a president it that Terry is correct in stating that sexual assault cases on campus can often be very difficult to resolve. Gathering the facts take time and often the victim is reluctant to talk or provide evidence. On the other hand, the perpetrator often times provides a counter story and evidence suggesting that the sex was consensual rather than forced. Many campuses now have cameras in the hallways of residence halls and always provide irrefutable evidence that a crime was most likely committed. It is clearly important that Presidents of colleges and deans of students do the right thing in sexual assault cases by following the colleges’ policies and procedures, applying due process and, if the evidence suggests, push for prosecution. I believe that every college president in our country does the right thing. if not, I can assure you he or she would not be president for long.
I have a 17 year-old daughter who will start her senior year in high school this fall. Having worked in higher education almost all of my entire career, I know intimately what happens in colleges and universities, especially at parties where alcohol and drug use and abuse leads to many sexual assaults. In a time when there is a 25% chance of female students being sexually assaulted, a sober discussion by administrators needs to be started immediately. I certainly have begun to seriously ponder this question, and will be advocating for more action by college and university presidents in future articles. My daughter will be entering college next year, and I want to know, as a parent, that she will be safe.
Monday, July 28, 2014
A Win for Affirmative Action? The Federal Appeals Court Decision in University of Texas at Austin Case
Recently the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit made big news on behalf of affirmative action in college admissions by upholding the University of Texas at Austin’s right to continue to use race in its undergraduate admissions. The Austin based university actually uses the “top-ten percent” plan, when essentially guarantees admission to the Austin campus to any student in Texas who graduated in the top 10 percent of his or her graduating class. The assumption is that since Texas continues to have segregated schools and in some areas of the state minority enrollments are well over 90% in K-12 schools and institutions of higher education. Case in point is the Rio Grande Valley area in south Texas, which is predominantly of Mexican origin.
The decision came on the heels of a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, which ruled that public colleges could, in fact, continue to use race in admissions, but only if the race based admission policy meets a narrow tailored goal or need of the university and the state.
A key issue, besides the top 10 percent plan, was the university’s desire to create “critical mass” among minority students through a process called race-conscious holistic review. However, less than 20% of the class for 2008, the year in question in this case, was evaluated and presumably admitted via the race-conscious holistic review process. In 2007, UT-Austin admitted approximately 6,300 freshman and this past fall they admitted 7,300 freshmen. Based on data from the university’s Office of Information Management and Analysis for the fall of 2013, Hispanics make up only 19.1% of overall student enrollment and white students 48.4%.
According to the recent publication by Susan Combs, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, “By 2020, the Texas Hispanic population is expected to outnumber the White population….” thus making Texas a minority-majority or better stated a Hispanic-majority state. According to 2013 U.S. Census data, the state is nearly 40% Hispanic and in some cities in Texas well over 50% to 90% Hispanic. And it will only get better, or worse depending on your perspective, by the year 2040 state demographers predict that the Hispanic population will grow to 18.8 million (53%) and whites will grow to 11.5 million (32%). In 1980, whites made up 66% of the state population and Hispanics 20.4%. Herein lies the crux of the matter, whites don’t want to give up their overwhelming majority share of the resources they currently enjoy.
Based on many years of collecting national data on college-bound students, Hispanic and black students score significantly lower than white students on standardized college admission tests such as the American College Test (ACT) or the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). In the UT-Austin case for the 2007 entering class, the average SAT score for Hispanics was 1155, for blacks 1073 and 1275 for whites. Nationally, data reported by the National Center for Educational Statistics for 2011-12, the average SAT scores (Critical Reading and Math scores combined) for Hispanics was 913, for blacks 856 and whites 1063. The fact is that standardized college admission tests are not race neutral, but that’s a subject for another time.
Shouldn’t Texas and for that matter the United States of America be educating a larger percentage of our minority students, at the very least, equal to their percentage in the population of Texas or the USA? Our country was founded by immigrants and build off the backs of immigrants. Minorities and immigrants are increasingly becoming the future workforce of Texas and the USA. Should we not provide them with a better education? We know that workers with more education make more money. The future workforce will of course support our retirement plans, pay into the Social Security System, pay taxes and, if highly educated, that translates into more money into the state and federal coffers.
The key compelling issue I feel is sometimes missed in the debate is that race-conscious admissions allow the state to level the playing field. We know from many years of collecting data that Hispanics and blacks perform lower on standardized tests compared to whites. Hispanics and black students in this country do not have the same advantages as white students. So, why should Hispanic and black students with lower test scores not be admitted to universities? Shouldn’t public universities enroll students in proportion to their representation in the state population? After all, UT-Austin is a public institution of higher education and supported by state funds. Hispanics and blacks pay their fair share, just like whites, of taxes to support the university. 19.1% Hispanic student enrollment at UT-Austin is hardly considered a fair, much less reasonable, share relative to the nearly 40% Hispanic population in Texas. This continued to keep Hispanics back in the 1980’s. Can one consider the decision handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeal a win for affirmative action? I don’t think so.
The decision came on the heels of a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, which ruled that public colleges could, in fact, continue to use race in admissions, but only if the race based admission policy meets a narrow tailored goal or need of the university and the state.
A key issue, besides the top 10 percent plan, was the university’s desire to create “critical mass” among minority students through a process called race-conscious holistic review. However, less than 20% of the class for 2008, the year in question in this case, was evaluated and presumably admitted via the race-conscious holistic review process. In 2007, UT-Austin admitted approximately 6,300 freshman and this past fall they admitted 7,300 freshmen. Based on data from the university’s Office of Information Management and Analysis for the fall of 2013, Hispanics make up only 19.1% of overall student enrollment and white students 48.4%.
According to the recent publication by Susan Combs, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, “By 2020, the Texas Hispanic population is expected to outnumber the White population….” thus making Texas a minority-majority or better stated a Hispanic-majority state. According to 2013 U.S. Census data, the state is nearly 40% Hispanic and in some cities in Texas well over 50% to 90% Hispanic. And it will only get better, or worse depending on your perspective, by the year 2040 state demographers predict that the Hispanic population will grow to 18.8 million (53%) and whites will grow to 11.5 million (32%). In 1980, whites made up 66% of the state population and Hispanics 20.4%. Herein lies the crux of the matter, whites don’t want to give up their overwhelming majority share of the resources they currently enjoy.
Based on many years of collecting national data on college-bound students, Hispanic and black students score significantly lower than white students on standardized college admission tests such as the American College Test (ACT) or the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). In the UT-Austin case for the 2007 entering class, the average SAT score for Hispanics was 1155, for blacks 1073 and 1275 for whites. Nationally, data reported by the National Center for Educational Statistics for 2011-12, the average SAT scores (Critical Reading and Math scores combined) for Hispanics was 913, for blacks 856 and whites 1063. The fact is that standardized college admission tests are not race neutral, but that’s a subject for another time.
Shouldn’t Texas and for that matter the United States of America be educating a larger percentage of our minority students, at the very least, equal to their percentage in the population of Texas or the USA? Our country was founded by immigrants and build off the backs of immigrants. Minorities and immigrants are increasingly becoming the future workforce of Texas and the USA. Should we not provide them with a better education? We know that workers with more education make more money. The future workforce will of course support our retirement plans, pay into the Social Security System, pay taxes and, if highly educated, that translates into more money into the state and federal coffers.
The key compelling issue I feel is sometimes missed in the debate is that race-conscious admissions allow the state to level the playing field. We know from many years of collecting data that Hispanics and blacks perform lower on standardized tests compared to whites. Hispanics and black students in this country do not have the same advantages as white students. So, why should Hispanic and black students with lower test scores not be admitted to universities? Shouldn’t public universities enroll students in proportion to their representation in the state population? After all, UT-Austin is a public institution of higher education and supported by state funds. Hispanics and blacks pay their fair share, just like whites, of taxes to support the university. 19.1% Hispanic student enrollment at UT-Austin is hardly considered a fair, much less reasonable, share relative to the nearly 40% Hispanic population in Texas. This continued to keep Hispanics back in the 1980’s. Can one consider the decision handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeal a win for affirmative action? I don’t think so.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)