Recently there has been a spate of articles in journals as diverse as Dow Jones, The New York Times, and Inside Higher Education which, when boiled down, ask about the fundamental value of a college education and raise the question of how, when we see that value, we will know what we are looking at. continue reading

I have been the founding president of both a community college and a state university. And in both cases, we (me, my co-workers, and the pioneering students at these schools) were subjected to the public skepticism that comes with making change.

·         It was a “waste of money”.

·         The colleges were “low quality”.

·         The learners were “not qualified to go to school.” 

This was, pure and simple, elitism masquerading as a concern for academic quality and fiscal restraint. But the naysayers were wrong. Today both institutions, and many others like them, are recognized as significant contributors to the social, civic, and economic health of their communities.  

As higher education’s private sector, flooded by hundreds of thousands of unemployed and under-employed Americans, steps up to help meet the President Obama’s educational goals, however, the naysayers are at it again, trying to scare people about the changes that are happening. Consider the recent Frontline story. If the dominant perspective lying behind this story were to prevail, the consequences would include:

·         the re-marginalization of hundreds of thousands American students,

·         the loss of a vital source of trained workers and more engaged citizens,

·         and the elimination of hundreds of thousands of jobs just when we need them the most.

But it won’t happen because, when the accurate story is told, including the contributions and the shortcomings of all higher education, including the private sector, common sense will dictate that we fix the problems and hold on to the successes. That’s the only hope we have of meeting the President’s graduation goals.

I, for one, believe that the “shock and dismay” exhibited by some about debt burdens and graduation rates is purposely slanted in an attempt to gain philosophical advantage in a political fight. Excessive debt and loan defaults are very serious problems. But, consider the following.

1.       The only way to meet President Obama’s goals is to succeed where we are currently failing, with millions of high-risk students.

·         In recessions, unemployed and underemployed people go back to school. So, millions of people have returned to school in the last three years. Most of them are, by definition, high-risk both academically and financially. 

·         At the same time, the President wants to dramatically increase college attainment. But the only way to do that is to reach out to those who have not been successful in college historically, people who are currently marginalized. They are, by definition, high-risk both academically and financially.

·         Conclusion:  the people going back to school in a recessionary environment are the newcomers the President wants us to serve.

2.       Low price public colleges are essential in the educational network, but private sector colleges have a significant contribution to make as well.

·         Public colleges receive public subsidies thus driving down their price to learners. This is a positive social benefit. But because of the recession and other constraints, most public colleges are overflowing with students and turning people away. In California alone it is estimated that more than 150,000 current students in community colleges who are nearing graduation will not get the courses they need to graduate this year.

·          Even in good economic times, the private sector’s nimbleness and service-orientation attract students who choose to pay a higher tuition because of the other services and personal attention they receive.

·         Where are these students, and the others who cannot be admitted to the state universities and community colleges, going to go? Or are we supposed to sit by and watch the “remarginalization” of hundreds of thousands of aspiring learners?

·         Conclusion: There is a huge access problem in the traditional sector.

3.       Private sector colleges are part of the solution.

·         Private sector colleges live by their tuition. Absent the huge state taxpayer subsidies received by traditional schools, they are higher cost to the students. 

·         Private sector colleges are attracting the very people who the president has targeted.

·         The Gates Foundation understands the importance of this role

·         Lumina Foundation understands the importance of this role

·         Many members of the Department of Education understand the importance of this role.

·         Conclusion: private sector colleges have the nimbleness, the quality, and the flexibility to step up and help with this critical national objective.

And that raises the point we should be focusing on. All of higher education – the private sector, community colleges, state colleges and universities, and private non-profit colleges – need to do a better job:

·         Of graduating the students who enroll.

·         Of advising students about the financial and economic consequences of the educational choices they make.

·         Of finding ways to pass more money through to reduced costs to the students, not to our bottom lines.

·         And, for obvious reasons, those of us who enroll the highest numbers of at-risk students - community colleges. Private sector institutions, and state colleges and universities - have the farthest to go.

Tainting the entire private sector with scary stories, however, while implying that the non-profit sector does a better job with the same students, is simply not accurate, by the numbers. This demonization is bad economics, bad education, and encourages an America with less educational and economic opportunity, just when we need more.

Conclusion: We are all in this fight for educational opportunity together. Let’s act that way.

Even as the recession eases, we are confronted by two realities: state budgets that are deeply in the red and a rising demand for higher education. The President says we need more success in higher education to stay economically viable. and learners are voting with their feet, returning to school in record numbers.  If, however, our objective is to open higher education to more qualified and capable people, and to succeed with them, what is the actual impact of the recession and state budget deficits on most students and colleges? continue reading

Let’s be honest: Does anyone really enjoy taking Pre-Calculus in college? Or Economics I or Accounting I, for that matter? I well remember sitting through these less-than-fun general education courses and wondering, “Why am I paying A LOT OF MONEY to be subjected to this?”

Fortunately, Pre-Calculus despisers like me can now rest a bit easier - the dreaded gen ed may be here to stay, but there’s a new way to avoid some of its (financial) pain. continue reading

Yesterday (December 9), Public Agenda released With Their Whole Lives Ahead of Them, a report funded in part by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which explores the reasons why college students drop out prior to completing their studies and earning their degrees. There is an interesting YouTube companion piece that presents some personal stories that reflect the report’s themes. continue reading

Anyone interested in the evolution of higher education in this country should read “Served, Yes, But Well Served?” by Doug Lederman in today’s (October 8, 2009) Inside Higher Education. Lots of good analysis and comments about the role of community colleges, traditional public and private four-year colleges, and for-profit providers of higher education. continue reading

So, I am not quite sure what to make of the “Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act,” a bill passed yesterday by the U.S. House of Representatives. The legislation - which is apparently expected to sail through the Democrat-controlled Senate and then be signed into law by President Obama - would make the federal government the sole source for federal student loans as of July 1, 2010. continue reading